Mastec Inc.
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K/A
(Amendment No. 1)
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004
Commission File Number 001-08106
MasTec, Inc.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
Florida
|
|
65-0829355 |
(State or Other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
800 S. Douglas Road, 12th Floor, |
|
|
Coral Gables, FL
|
|
33134 |
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(305) 599-1800
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered |
|
|
|
Common Stock, $.10 Par Value
|
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act: None
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such period that
the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark 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. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in the
Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). Yes þ No o
The aggregate market value of the registrants outstanding common stock held by non-affiliates
of the registrant computed by reference to the price at which the common stock was last sold as of
the last business day of the registrants most recently completed second fiscal quarter was
$146,606,680 (based on a closing price of $5.43 per share for the registrants common stock on the
New York Stock Exchange on June 30, 2004).
There were 48,748,206 shares of common stock outstanding as of March 3, 2005.
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Explanatory Note
Mastec, Inc. (the Company) is filing this Amendment No. 1 to its Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the 2004 10-K), which was originally filed on March 31,
2005. This Amendment No. 1 is being filed to address comments from the staff of the Securities and
Exchange Commission in connection with the staffs review of the 2004 10-K. This Amendment No. 1
amends: (i) Part II, Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of OperationsCritical Accounting Policies and Estimates to provide more detailed
disclosure regarding the Companys recognition of deferred tax assets; (ii) Part I, Item 8
Financial StatementsNote 1 to provide more detailed disclosure regarding the Companys recognition
of deferred tax assets; (iii) Part II, Item 9A, Internal Controls and Procedures to delete a scope
limitation to its Managements Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting; and (iv) the
certifications required by Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended (the Exchange Act), so that they be dated as of a current date as required by Rule
12b-15 of the Exchange Act.
This Amendment No. 1 does not result in a change in the Companys previously reported earnings
shown in its Consolidated Statements of Operations or on any amounts previously reported in its
Consolidated Balance Sheets. Further, this Amendment No. 1 does not reflect events occurring after
the filing of the 2004 Form 10-K, and does not modify or update the disclosures therein in any way
other than as required to reflect the amendments described above.
2
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
We are making this statement pursuant to the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking
statements described in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We make statements
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in the documents that we incorporate by reference into this
Annual Report that are forward-looking. When used in this Annual Report or in any other
presentation, statements which are not historical in nature, including the words anticipate,
estimate, should, expect, believe, intend, target, project and similar expressions
are intended to identify forward-looking statements. They also include statements regarding:
|
|
|
our future growth and profitability; |
|
|
|
|
our competitive strengths; and |
|
|
|
|
our business strategy and the trends we anticipate in the industries and economies in which we operate. |
These forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and are subject to a
number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions relating to:
|
|
|
economic downturns, consolidation and technological and regulatory changes in the industries we serve; |
|
|
|
|
consolidation within our markets; |
|
|
|
|
technical and regulatory changes in our clients industries; |
|
|
|
|
the highly competitive nature of our industry; |
|
|
|
|
the ability of our clients to terminate many of our contracts; |
|
|
|
|
the seasonality and quarterly variations we experience in our revenue and profitability; |
|
|
|
|
our dependence on a limited number of clients; |
|
|
|
|
the restrictions imposed by our credit facility and senior notes; and |
|
|
|
|
the other factors referenced in this Annual Report, including, without limitation,
under Item 1. Business, including the subsection of such item captioned Risk Factors
and Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations. |
We believe these forward-looking statements are reasonable; however, you should not place
undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which are based on current expectations.
Furthermore, forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. If any of these
risks or uncertainties materialize, or if any of our underlying assumptions are incorrect, our
actual results may differ significantly from the results that we express in or imply by any of our
forward-looking statements. These and other risks are detailed in this Annual Report on Form 10-K,
in the documents that we incorporate by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in other
documents that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We do not undertake any
obligation to publicly update or revise these forward-looking statements after the date of this
Annual Report on Form 10-K to reflect future events or circumstances. We qualify any and all of
our forward-looking statements by these cautionary factors.
In conducting our audit for the year ended December 31, 2003 and filing our 2003 Annual Report
on Form 10-K, we restated our annual financial statements for 2000, 2001, and 2002. Except as
otherwise stated, all financial information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K gives
effect to these restatements.
3
PART I
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations
should be read in conjunction with our historical consolidated financial statements and related
notes thereto in Item 8. Financial Statements. The discussion below contains forward-looking
statements that are based upon our current expectation and are subject to uncertainty and changes
in circumstances. Actual results may differ materially from these expectations due to inaccurate
assumptions and known or unknown risks and uncertainties, including those identified in Cautionary
Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements. The consolidated results of operations in 2002
and 2003 reflect the reclassification of 2002 and 2003 results of continuing operations for the
Brazil operations and our Network Services division to discontinued operations.
Overview
We serve providers of telecommunications services, broadband services (including cable,
satellite and high-speed Internet) energy services and traffic control and homeland security
systems.
Revenue by customer industry group is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
|
2002 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Telecommunications |
|
$ |
329,853 |
|
|
$ |
231,263 |
|
|
$ |
251,083 |
|
Broadband |
|
|
152,104 |
|
|
|
265,383 |
|
|
|
342,553 |
|
Energy |
|
|
162,822 |
|
|
|
198,583 |
|
|
|
175,314 |
|
Government |
|
|
121,688 |
|
|
|
132,251 |
|
|
|
144,845 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A significant portion of our revenue is derived from service agreements. Some of these
agreements are billed on a time and materials basis and revenue is recognized as the services are
rendered. The remainder of these agreements are referred to as master service agreements, because
they are exclusive (with certain exceptions) up to a specified dollar amount per work order within
a defined geographic area. Work performed under service agreements is typically generated by work
orders, each of which is performed for a fixed fee. The majority of these services typically are of
a maintenance nature and to a lesser extent upgrade services. These service agreements are
frequently awarded on a competitive bid basis, although clients are often willing to negotiate
contract extensions beyond their original terms without re-bidding. Our service agreements have
various terms, depending upon the nature of the services provided and are typically subject to
termination by the client on short notice. Under our master service and similar type service
agreements we furnish various specified units of service for a separate fixed price per unit of
service. We recognize revenue as the related unit of service is performed. Profitability will be
reduced if the actual costs to complete each unit exceed original estimates on fixed price service
agreements. We also immediately recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on these fixed fee
projects if estimated costs to complete the remaining units for the project exceed the revenue to
be received from such units.
The remainder of our work is provided pursuant to contracts for specific
installation/construction projects or jobs. For installation/construction projects, we recognize
revenue on the units-of-delivery or percentage-of-completion methods. Revenue on unit based
projects is recognized using the units-of-delivery method. Under the units-of-delivery method,
revenue is recognized as the units are completed at the contractually agreed price per unit. For
certain clients with unit based construction/installation contracts, we recognize revenue after the
service is performed and work orders are approved to ensure that collectibility is probable from
these clients. Revenue from completed work orders not collected in accordance with the payment
terms established with these clients is not recognized until collection is assured. Revenue on
non-unit based contracts is recognized using the percentage-of-completion method. Under the
percentage-of-completion method, we record revenue as work on the contract progresses. The
cumulative amount of revenue recorded on a contract at a specified point in time is that percentage
of total estimated revenue that incurred costs to date bear to estimated total contract costs.
Clients are billed with varying frequency: weekly, monthly or upon attaining specific milestones.
Such contracts generally include retainage provisions under which 2% to 15% of the contract price
is withheld from us until the work has been completed and accepted by the client.
Revenue by type of contract is as follows:
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
|
2002 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
Master service and other service agreements |
|
$ |
494,357 |
|
|
$ |
560,127 |
|
|
$ |
636,563 |
|
Installation/construction projects agreements |
|
|
272,110 |
|
|
|
267,353 |
|
|
|
277,232 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our costs of revenue include the costs of providing services or completing the projects under
our contracts including operations payroll and benefits, fuel, subcontractor costs, equipment
rental, materials not provided by our clients, and insurance. Profitability will be reduced if the
actual costs to complete each unit exceed original estimates on fixed price service agreements. We
also immediately recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on fixed fee projects if estimated
costs to complete the remaining units for the project exceed the revenue to be received from such
units.
Our clients generally supply materials such as cable, conduit and telephone equipment.
Customer furnished materials are not included in revenue and cost of sales due to all materials
being purchased by the customer. The customer determines the specifications of the materials that
are to be utilized to perform installation/construction services. We are only responsible for the
performance of the installation/construction services and not the materials for any contract that
includes customer furnished materials nor do we not have any risk associated with customer
furnished materials. Our customers retain the financial and performance risk of all customer
furnished materials.
General and administrative expenses include all costs of our management and administrative
personnel, severance payments, reserves for bad debts, rent, utilities, travel and business
development efforts and back office administration such as financial services, insurance,
administration, professional costs and clerical and administrative overhead.
In March 2004, we ceased performing contractual services in Brazil, abandoned all assets of
our Brazil subsidiary and made a determination to exit the Brazil market. During the year ended
December 31, 2004, we wrote off approximately $12.3 million in goodwill and the net investment in
our Brazil subsidiary of approximately $6.8 million which consisted of the accumulated foreign
currency translation loss of $21.3 million less a net deficit in assets of $14.5 million. The
abandoned subsidiary has been classified as a discontinued operation and its net losses are not
included in our consolidated net loss from continuing operations for the years ended December 31,
2002, 2003 and 2004. The net income (loss) for our Brazil subsidiary was reclassified to
discontinued operations in the amount of $1.2 million and $(21.8) million for the years ended
December 31, 2002 and 2003, respectively. The net loss for the year ended December 31, 2004
included in discontinued operations was $20.2 million. In November 2004, the subsidiary applied
for relief and was adjudicated bankrupt by a Brazilian bankruptcy court. The subsidiary is
currently being liquidated under court supervision.
During the fourth quarter 2004, we ceased performing services and committed to sell our
Network Services division and exit this service market. This division has been classified as a
discontinued operation and its net losses are not included in our consolidated net loss from
continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003, and 2004. The net loss for the
Network Services division was reclassified to discontinued operations in the amount of $17.9
million and $6.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2003, respectively. The net
loss for the year ended December 31, 2004 included in discontinued operations was $3.0 million.
Financial Metrics
Members of our senior management team regularly review key performance metrics and the status
of operating initiatives within our business. These key performance indicators are:
|
|
|
revenue by client and industry; |
|
|
|
|
monthly, quarterly and annual changes in revenue by client and industry; |
|
|
|
|
backlog; |
|
|
|
|
costs of revenue, and general and administrative expenses as percentages of revenue; |
|
|
|
|
number of vehicles and equipment per employee; |
|
|
|
|
days sales outstanding; and |
5
|
|
|
interest and debt service coverage ratios. |
We analyze this information periodically through operating reviews which include detailed
discussions related to significant jobs/projects, proposed investments in new business
opportunities or property and equipment and integration and cost reduction efforts.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is based upon
our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with United States
generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these financial statements requires us
to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue
and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, we
evaluate our estimates, including those related to revenue recognition, allowance for doubtful
accounts, intangible assets, reserves and accruals, impairment of assets, income taxes, insurance
reserves and litigation and contingencies. We base our estimates on historical experience and on
various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results
of which form the basis of making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities,
that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates if
conditions change or if certain key assumptions used in making these estimates ultimately prove to
be materially incorrect.
We believe the following critical accounting policies involve our more significant judgments
and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.
Revenue Recognition
Revenue and related costs for master and other service agreements billed on a time and
materials basis are recognized as the services are rendered. There are also some master service
agreements that are billed on a fixed fee basis. Under our fixed fee master service and similar
type service agreements we furnish various specified units of service for a separate fixed price
per unit of service. We recognize revenue as the related unit of service is performed. For
service agreements on a fixed fee basis, profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to
complete each unit exceed original estimates. We also immediately recognize the full amount of any
estimated loss on these fixed fee projects if estimated costs to complete the remaining units
exceed the revenue to be received from such units.
We recognize revenue on unit based construction/installation projects using the
units-of-delivery method. Our unit based contracts relate primarily to contracts that require the
installation or construction of specified units within an infrastructure system. Under the
units-of-delivery method, revenue is recognized at the contractually agreed upon price as the units
are completed and delivered. Our profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to complete
each unit exceed our original estimates. We are also required to immediately recognize the full
amount of any estimated loss on these projects if estimated costs to complete the remaining units
for the project exceed the revenue to be earned on such units. For certain clients with unit based
construction/installation contracts we recognize revenue after service has been performed and work
orders are approved to ensure that collectibility is probable from these clients. Revenue from
completed work orders not collected in accordance with the payment terms established with these
clients is not recognized until collection is assured.
Our non-unit based, fixed price installation/construction contracts relate primarily to
contracts that require the construction design and installation of an entire infrastructure system.
We recognize revenue and related costs as work progresses on non-unit based, fixed price contracts
using the percentage-of-completion method, which relies on contract revenue and estimates of total
expected costs. We estimate total project costs and profit to be earned on each long-term,
fixed-price contract prior to commencement of work on the contract. We follow this method since
reasonably dependable estimates of the revenue and costs applicable to various stages of a contract
can be made. Under the percentage-of-completion method, we record revenue and recognize profit or
loss as work on the contract progresses. The cumulative amount of revenue recorded on a contract
at a specified point in time is that percentage of total estimated revenue that incurred costs to
date bear to estimated total contract costs, after adjusting estimated total contract costs for the
most recent information. If, as work progresses, the actual contract costs exceed our estimates,
the profit we recognize from that contract decreases. We recognize the full amount of any
estimated loss on a contract at the time our estimates indicate such a loss.
Our clients generally supply materials such as cable, conduit and telephone equipment.
Customer furnished materials are not included in revenue and cost of sales as all materials are
purchased by the customer. The customer determines the specification of the materials that are to
be utilized to perform installation/construction services. We are only responsible for the
performance of the
6
installation/construction services and not the materials for any contract that includes customer
furnished materials and nor do we have any risk associated with customer furnished materials. Our
customers retain the financial and performance risk of all customer furnished materials.
We have commenced legal action against some of our clients in connection with work performed
in 2003. In addition, we have made claims for amounts in excess of the agreed contract price (or
amounts not included in the original contract price) that we seek to collect from clients for
delays we believe were caused by the clients, errors in specifications and designs, change orders
in dispute or unapproved as to either scope or price, or other causes of unanticipated additional
costs. Although any costs for the work related to these claims have been included in costs of
revenue, since we cannot reliably estimate what amounts, if any, of these claims are probable of
collection, we have not recognized any of these claims as revenue to date. We will recognize
revenue on these claims upon collections. We may not be successful in collecting any of these
claims. See Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the inability
of our clients to make required payments. Management analyzes past due balances based on invoice
date, historical bad debt experience, client concentrations, client credit-worthiness, client
financial condition and credit reports, the availability of mechanics and other liens, the
existence of payment bonds and other sources of payment, and current economic trends when
evaluating the adequacy of the allowance for doubtful accounts. We review the adequacy of reserves
for doubtful accounts on a quarterly basis. If our estimates of the collectibility of accounts
receivable are incorrect, adjustments to the allowance for doubtful accounts may be required, which
could reduce our profitability.
Our estimates for our allowance for doubtful accounts are subject to significant change during
times of economic weakness or uncertainty in either the overall U.S. economy or the industries we
serve, and our loss experience has increased during such times.
We recorded provisions against earnings for doubtful accounts of $15.4, $8.8, and $5.1 million
for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively.
Inventories
Inventories consist of materials and supplies for construction projects, and are typically
purchased on a project-by-project basis. Inventories are valued using the weighted average-cost
method and are stated at the lower of cost or market. Construction projects are completed pursuant
to customer specifications. The loss of the customer or the cancellation of the project could
result in an impairment of the value of materials purchased for that customer or project.
Technological or market changes can also render certain materials obsolete. Allowances for
inventory obsolescence are determined based upon the specific facts and circumstances for each
project and market conditions. During 2002, 2003 and 2004, we recorded inventory obsolescence
provisions of $5.2 million, $2.2 million and $0.9 million, respectively, that have been included in
Costs of revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Operations in Item 8 of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Depreciation
We depreciate our property and equipment over estimated useful lives using the straight-line
method. We periodically review changes in technology and industry conditions, asset retirement
activity and salvage values to determine adjustments to estimated remaining useful lives and
depreciation rates.
Effective November 30, 2002, we implemented the results of a review of the estimated service
lives of our property and equipment in use. Useful lives were adjusted to reflect the extended use
of much of our equipment. In addition, the adjustments made the estimated useful lives for similar
equipment consistent among all operating units. Depreciation expense was reduced by $5.8 million
for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004 from the amount of expense which would had been
reported using the previous useful lives as a result of the change of estimate. During 2002 we also
implemented a plan to improve profitability by more effectively utilizing our fleet. Under the
plan, we began disposing of excess or underutilized assets in 2002.
During 2003 and 2004, we continued to dispose of excess assets and increased our reliance on
operating leases to finance equipment needs, thereby reducing our depreciation expense. We do
anticipate continued declines in our depreciation expense, since we believe we can continue to use
more lease opportunities.
7
Valuation of Equity Investments.
We have one common stock investment which we account for by the equity method because we own
between 20% and 50% of the common stock and we have a non-controlling ownership interest. Our
share of the earnings or losses in this investment is included in the consolidated statements of
operations. As of December 31, 2004, our investment exceeded the net equity of such investment and
accordingly the excess is considered to be equity goodwill. We evaluate the equity goodwill for
impairment under Accounting Principles Board No. 18, The Equity Method of Accounting for
Investments in Common Stock, as amended.
In December 2003, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 46R (FIN 46R) which clarified some
of the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities.
(FIN 46) and exempted certain entities from its requirements. FIN 46R was effective on March 31,
2004. We have considered the provisions of FIN 46R for this investment and believe it will not be
necessary to include in our consolidated financial statements any assets, liabilities or activities
of this investment. We have provided certain disclosed information of this investment in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K in Item 8. Financial Statements. Note 12.
Valuation of Long-Lived Assets
We review long-lived assets, consisting primarily of property and equipment and intangible
assets with finite lives, for impairment in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (SFAS No. 144).
In analyzing potential impairment, we use projections of future undiscounted cash flows from the
assets. These projections are based on our views of growth rates for the related business,
anticipated future economic conditions and the appropriate discount rates relative to risk and
estimates of residual values. We believe that our estimates are consistent with assumptions that
marketplace participants would use in their estimates of fair value. However, economic conditions,
interest rates, the anticipated cash flows of the businesses related to these assets and our
business strategies are all subject to change in the future. If changes in growth rates, future
economic conditions or discount rates and estimates of terminal values were to occur, long-lived
assets may become impaired. During 2002, 2003 and 2004, we recognized impairment losses and
write-offs of long-lived assets of $12.8 million, $0.9 million and $2.0 million, respectively,
relating to long-lived assets no longer in use and held for sale, certain assets in use and
long-lived assets related to the discontinued operations in Brazil.
Valuation of Intangible Assets
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, we conduct, on at
least an annual basis, a review of our reporting units to determine whether their carrying value
exceeds fair market value as determined using a discounted cash flow methodology for each unit.
Should this be the case, the value of our goodwill may be impaired and written down. Our adoption
of SFAS No. 142 in 2002 resulted in a write-down of our goodwill, net of tax, in the amount of
$25.7 million net of $13.8 million tax benefit, to reduce the carrying value of our goodwill. This
charge was reflected as a cumulative effect of an accounting change in the consolidated statement
of operations included in Item 8. of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, of which $13.1 million has
been reclassified to discontinued operations. Impairment losses subsequent to adoption totaling
$79.7 million ($51.9 million, net of tax) are reflected in our operating results in the
Consolidated Statement of Operations for 2002.
In connection with the disposition of the Brazil subsidiary, we wrote off goodwill associated
with this reporting entity in the amount of $12.3 million in 2004 which is included in discontinued
operations.
We could record additional impairment losses if, in the future, profitability and cash flows
of our reporting units decline to the point where the carrying value of those units exceed their
market value.
Insurance Reserves
We presently maintain insurance policies subject to per claim deductibles of $2 million for
our workers compensation, and general liability policies and $3 million for our automobile
liability policy. We have excess umbrella coverages up to $100 million per claim and in the
aggregate. We are required to post letters of credit to secure our obligation to reimburse the
insurance carrier for amounts that have been or could potentially be advanced by the carrier within
the deductible layer and also post letters of credit to our surety company. Such letters of credit
amounted to $63.3 million at December 31, 2004. We actuarially determine any liabilities for unpaid
claims and associated expenses, including incurred but not reported losses, and reflect those
liabilities in our balance sheet as other current and non-current liabilities. The determination of
such claims and expenses and the appropriateness of the related liability is reviewed and updated
quarterly. However, insurance liabilities are difficult to assess and estimate due to the many
relevant factors,
8
the effects of which are often unknown, including the severity of an injury, the determination
of our liability in proportion to other parties, the number of incidents not reported and the
effectiveness of our safety program. We are working with our insurance carrier to resolve claims
more quickly in an effort to reduce our exposure. We are also attempting to accelerate the claims
process where possible so that amounts incurred can be reported rather than estimated. In
addition, known amounts for claims that are in the process of being settled, but that have been
paid in periods subsequent to those being reported, are booked in such reporting period. For
example, Reliance Insurance Company, our insurance carrier for certain liabilities through July
2000, was placed into receivership in 2001. We have considered the financial condition of Reliance
in the determination of our unpaid claims, including our estimate of claims incurred but not
reported, that would be subject to reimbursement by Reliance. Our accruals are based upon known
facts, historical trends and our reasonable estimate of future expenses and we believe such
accruals to be adequate. If we do not accurately estimate the losses resulting from these claims,
we may experience losses in excess of our estimated liability, which may reduce our profitability.
We also may be required to post additional collateral with the insurance carrier, which could
reduce our liquidity, or pay increased insurance premiums, which could decrease our profitability.
On January 1, 2004, we formed a captive insurance subsidiary, JMC Insurance Company, Inc., a
South Carolina corporation, to write a portion of our own workers compensation, general liability
and automobile liability coverages under deductible reinsurance policies. JMC Insurance Company,
Inc., which is our first formation and management of a captive insurance company, was capitalized
with a $1 million letter of credit.
Income Taxes
We record income taxes using the liability method of accounting for deferred income taxes.
Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the expected future tax
consequence of temporary differences between the financial statement and income tax bases of our
assets and liabilities. We estimate our income taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which we
operate. This process involves estimating our tax exposure together with assessing temporary
differences resulting from differing treatment of items, such as deferred revenue, for tax and
accounting purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are
included within our consolidated balance sheet. The recording of a net deferred tax asset assumes
the realization of such asset in the future. Otherwise a valuation allowance must be recorded to
reduce this asset to its net realizable value. We consider future pretax income and ongoing prudent
and feasible tax planning strategies in assessing the need for such a valuation allowance. In the
event that we determine that we may not be able to realize all or part of the net deferred tax
asset in the future, a valuation allowance for the deferred tax asset is charged against income in
the period such determination is made.
As a result of our 2003 and 2004 operating losses, we have recorded valuation allowances
aggregating $8.3 million and $32.3 million as of December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively, to
reduce certain of our net deferred Federal, foreign and state tax assets to their estimated net
realizable value. We anticipate that we will generate sufficient pretax income in the future to
realize our deferred tax assets. In the event that our future pretax operating income is
insufficient for us to use our deferred tax assets, we have based our determination that the
deferred tax assets are still realizable based on a feasible tax planning strategy that is
available to us involving the sale of one of our divisions.
Restructuring Charges
During the second quarter of 2002, we initiated a study to determine the proper balance of
downsizing and cost cutting in relation to our ability to respond to current and future work
opportunities in each of our service offerings. The review not only evaluated our current
operations, but also the growth and opportunity potential of each service offering as well as the
consolidation of back-office processes. As a result of this review, we implemented a restructuring
program which included:
|
|
|
Elimination or reduction in the scope of service offerings that no longer fit into our
core business strategy or long-term business plan. |
|
|
|
|
Reduction or elimination of services that do not produce adequate revenue or margins to
support the level of profitability, return on investment or investments in capital
resources. This includes exiting contracts that do not meet the minimum rate of return
requirements and aggressively seeking to improve margins and reduce costs. |
|
|
|
|
Analysis of businesses that provide adequate profit contributions but still need margin
improvements which includes aggressive cost reductions and efficiencies. |
|
|
|
|
Review of new business opportunities in similar business lines that can utilize our
existing human and physical resources. |
9
The elements of the restructuring program included involuntary terminations of employees in
affected service offerings and the consolidation of facilities. The plan resulted in a pre-tax
charge to operations of $3.7 million in 2002. The involuntary terminations impacted both the
salaried and hourly employee groups. Approximately 1,025 employees were impacted in 2002. As of
December 31, 2004, all employees to be terminated pursuant to our restructuring program have been
terminated. We also closed approximately 25 facilities during 2002 as part of the program in which
some of the assets were sold, while other assets were retained and transferred to other locations.
These facility closures were not accounted for as discontinued operations due to these facilities
not representing separate components of our business for which cash flows could be clearly defined.
We also continue to be involved in the markets in which these 25 facilities operated.
In addition to the costs noted above, we paid a consulting firm approximately $4.6 million to
assist us in preparing the plan, all of which was expensed in 2002 as the plan was complete as of
December 31, 2002. We also recognized valuation allowances and impairment losses related to
property and equipment of approximately $12.8 million in connection with the restructuring plan in
the year ended December 31, 2002.
The following is a reconciliation of the restructuring accruals as of December 31, 2004 which
represents remaining lease costs as well as reductions in the restructuring accruals during 2003
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued costs at December 31, 2003 |
|
$ |
600 |
|
Cash payments |
|
|
(388 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued costs at December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
212 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Economic conditions, our business strategies or other factors could dictate further downsizing
or elimination of elements of our business in the future, resulting in additional restructuring
charges in 2005.
Litigation and Contingencies
Litigation and contingencies are reflected in our consolidated financial statements based on
our assessments, along with legal counsel, of the expected outcome of such litigation or expected
resolution of such contingency. An accrual is made when the loss of such contingency is probable
and estimable. If the final outcome of such litigation and contingencies differs significantly
from our current expectations, such outcome could result in a charge to earnings. See Part I Item
3. Legal Proceedings. for discussions of current litigation.
Results of Operations
Restatement of Financial Statements
In connection with the filing of our 2003 Form 10-K, we restated our annual financial
statements for the year ended December 31, 2002 to increase our insurance expense (net of tax) and
to record a valuation allowance for certain of our net deferred state tax assets. See Note 2 to our
Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8. in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for an explanation
of these restatements. The following table shows the net impact of the restatements on our loss
before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle and benefit for income taxes, net loss
before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle and net loss before the effect of
reclassifying certain continuing operations to discontinued operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
As Previously |
|
|
|
|
Reported |
|
As Restated |
Loss before cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle and benefit for
income taxes |
|
$ |
(168,608 |
) |
|
$ |
(173,324 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle |
|
$ |
(103,135 |
) |
|
$ |
(110,885 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(128,806 |
) |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
We also restated our quarterly financial information for 2003 as a result of certain
adjustments to revenue and other items that impact these previously issued quarterly reports. See
Note 2 to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for an explanation of these restatements
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
Quarter Ended |
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
March 31, 2003 |
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
September 30, 2003 |
|
|
As Previously |
|
As |
|
As Previously |
|
As |
|
As Previously |
|
As |
|
|
Reported |
|
Restated * |
|
Reported |
|
Restated * |
|
Reported |
|
Restated * |
Revenue |
|
$ |
180,569 |
|
|
$ |
180,297 |
|
|
$ |
209,108 |
|
|
$ |
207,841 |
|
|
$ |
248,373 |
|
|
$ |
242,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income
before cumulative
effect of change in
accounting
principle and
benefit (provision)
for income taxes |
|
$ |
(2,648 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,920 |
) |
|
$ |
4,733 |
|
|
$ |
3,466 |
|
|
$ |
10,662 |
|
|
$ |
4,121 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
before cumulative
effect of change in
accounting
principle |
|
$ |
(1,588 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,752 |
) |
|
$ |
2,765 |
|
|
$ |
2,020 |
|
|
$ |
6,250 |
|
|
$ |
2,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(1,588 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,752 |
) |
|
$ |
2,765 |
|
|
$ |
2,020 |
|
|
$ |
6,250 |
|
|
$ |
2,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Before the effect of reclassification of certain continuing operations to discontinued
operations. |
Except as otherwise stated, all financial information contained in this Annual Report on Form
10-K gives effect to the restatements.
2005 Outlook
We believe we have increased market opportunities in 2005 in five areas:
Fiber to the Home (FTTH) In many markets, cable television providers have upgraded their
networks to fiber optics which can provide video, video on demand, pay-per-view, high-speed
Internet and telephony using VOIP. In contrast, RBOCs, municipalities and rural telephone
companies presently rely primarily on copper wire infrastructures. In response to the competitive
threat from cable providers, these entities have begun the process to upgrade their infrastructures
with optical fiber, or FTTH. We believe that our resources, relationships and capabilities
position us to benefit from the market opportunity. We also believe our rural telephone company
clients will proceed with FTTH projects, utilizing available funding from the Rural Utility
Service. Additionally, some municipalities are expected to build their own FTTH networks, and we
are pursuing greater levels of business with these customers. The three major RBOCs have
announced their intentions to enhance their infrastructures which may increase revenue in 2005. We
have already experienced an increase in this type of revenue in the first quarter of 2005.
Satellite Install to the Home DIRECTV® continues to add a large number of new
subscribers, which represents an expected increase in revenue for our installation and maintenance
work in this area.
Federal Market for Telecommunications Upgrades The Federal government plans to continue to
upgrade its telecommunications networks and systems for military bases, ports, borders and security
systems. We are making a concerted effort to market to major government contracting firms and
believe we can establish ourselves as a participant in this market.
Local Maintenance Work for Electrical Grid Upgrades We believe market and other conditions
are making it increasingly attractive for utilities to outsource their maintenance activities and
we are marketing our services in this area.
RBOC Maintenance Agreements We serve RBOCs in states that are currently experiencing
increases in population such as Florida, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Texas. We believe that population increases in these states could increase the demand for our
services.
Our 2005 results could be adversely affected by the matters discussed in Item 1. under the
title Risk Factors of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and by the matters discussed in the
paragraphs that follow.
|
|
|
The revenue from Comcast in 2003 and 2004 was driven to a significant extent by large
projects to rebuild and upgrade Comcasts existing broadband networks in certain areas of
the country. This rebuild and upgrade work will be minimal in 2005 due to most of the work
being completed by December 31, 2004. Consequently, revenue from Comcast will |
11
|
|
|
significantly decline in 2005. To replace this revenue, we plan to pursue additional work
from our broadband customers for installations to new and existing homes and more maintenance
and repair work. In addition, we plan to pursue additional work related to FTTH initiatives. |
|
|
|
|
Our status as an approved bidder on any state Department of Transportation (DOT) work
is dependent in part on our submission on a timely basis of audited financial statements.
Due to the delay in the completion of our 2003 audit, we were unable to submit our 2003
financial statements within the period required by the states of Florida and Texas. These
states require that we submit on an annual basis, audited financial statements within 120
days after the end of the audited period. Several other state DOTs also require us to
submit our annual financial information to qualify as an approved direct bidder for their
projects. We have subsequently requalified in Texas, but remain unqualified in Florida and
several other states. Until we submit our audited financial statements and other
information on a timely basis, our status as an approved bidder for new states DOT work has
been, or could be, suspended. As a result, until we are able to comply with the applicable
state DOT requirements we could be unable to serve as a direct provider of new services to
several state DOTs and, we could experience a decrease in revenue from these clients. |
|
|
|
|
We have commenced legal action against some of our clients in connection with work
performed in 2003. Outstanding accounts receivable, (exclusive of claims amounts) relating
to contracts on which we are making claims amounted to $12.2 million at December 31, 2004.
In addition, we have made claims for amounts in excess of the agreed contract price (or
amounts not included in the original contract price) that we seek to collect from clients
for delays we believe were caused by the client, errors in specifications and designs,
change orders in dispute or unapproved as to both scope and price, or other causes of
unanticipated additional costs. Any costs for the work related to these claims have been
included in costs of revenue in 2003. However, as we cannot conclude that any of these
claim amounts are probable of collection, we have not recognized such claim amounts as
revenue for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004. If we are unsuccessful in our
negotiations with our clients for some of these claims, we will take legal actions in an
attempt to collect such amounts. Our clients may counterclaim against us for alleged
contract damages, alleged liquidated damages and/or indemnification. If our clients can
establish a contract entitlement, that entitlement could reduce any amounts otherwise due
us from the client (including any remaining outstanding accounts receivable from the
customer under the agreed contract price) and/or create liabilities for us. |
|
|
|
|
In the second quarter of 2004, purported class action complaints were filed against us
and certain of our officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of Florida and one was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of New York. These cases have been consolidated in the Southern District of Florida. The
complaints allege certain violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, related to current and prior period earnings report. Plaintiffs
contend that our financial statements during the purported class period of August 12, 2003
to May 11, 2004 were materially misleading. See Item 3. Legal Proceedings for full
description of claims. We believe the claims are without merit. We may be unable to
successfully resolve these disputes without incurring significant expenses. |
|
|
|
|
Under our credit facility, we are required to be in compliance with certain covenants.
As a result of our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2004, we were not in compliance
with the financial covenants of our credit facility at December 31, 2004. The credit
facility was amended on March 17, 2005 modifying these covenants and as a result we were in
compliance with our amended credit facilitys financial covenants at December 31, 2004. We
are dependent upon borrowings and letters of credit under the credit facility to fund our
operations. While we believe we will be in compliance with the terms and covenants of the
amended credit facility for 2005, we may not be able to achieve our 2005 internal
projections and thus may not be in compliance with the terms and covenants of our amended
credit facility. Should we be unable to comply with such terms and covenants, we would be
required to obtain further modifications of the credit facility or another source of
financing to continue to operate. Any such modifications or other sources of financing
could significantly increase our financing costs. See Item 7. Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Financial Condition, Liquidity
and Capital Resources. |
Comparisons of Fiscal Year Results
The components of our consolidated statements of operations, expressed as a percentage of
revenue, are set forth in the following table:
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Revenue |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation |
|
|
89.2 |
|
|
|
90.0 |
|
|
|
90.7 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
|
8.6 |
|
|
|
8.2 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
10.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net of interest income |
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Other (expense) income, net |
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle benefit
for income taxes and minority interest |
|
|
(21.7 |
) |
|
|
(4.0 |
) |
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes |
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle |
|
|
(14.0 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle |
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(15.6 |
)% |
|
|
(3.0 |
)% |
|
|
(2.9 |
)% |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
(3.3 |
) |
|
|
(2.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
(17.8 |
) |
|
|
(6.3 |
) |
|
|
(5.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following discussion and analysis of our results of operations should be read in
conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto in Item 8 of this Form
10-K.
Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2004 and 2003
Revenue. Our revenue was $913.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to
$827.5 million for the same period in 2003, representing an increase of $86.3 million or 10.4%.
This increase was due primarily to the increased revenue of approximately $96.7 million received
from DIRECTV® and, to a lesser extent government and telecommunication customers.
Revenue from telecommunications increased $23.3 million in 2004. We expect this trend to continue
to increase in 2005. The increase in revenue was offset by a decrease in revenue from energy
clients by $23.3 million in 2004 due to the gas pipeline and electrical substation revenue projects
being completed in 2003 and a slight decrease in revenue from broadband clients due to the Comcast
work slowing down towards completion at the end of 2004.
While we have refocused our business towards large, financially stable telecommunications,
broadband, energy, governmental and other clients, these clients may not continue to fund capital
expenditures for infrastructure projects at current levels or we may not be able to increase our
market share with these stronger clients.
Costs of Revenue. Our costs of revenue were $828.7 million or 90.7% of revenue for the year
ended December 31, 2004, compared to $744.6 million or 90.0% of revenue for the same period in 2003
reflecting that the costs remained consistent as a percentage of revenue. In the year ended
December 31, 2004, we recorded losses on construction projects in the amount of $7.8 million
compared to approximately $28.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2003. These losses arose
from project costs that exceeded our expectations for a variety of reasons including internal bid,
project management and cost estimation issues, errors in specifications and design, work outside of
original contract scope and customer caused delays. In addition, we recorded obsolescence
provisions for inventory of $0.9 million mainly due to inventories that were purchased for specific
jobs no longer in process and which may not be used in the future. In the year ended December 31,
2003, an obsolescence provision was recorded in the amount of $1.8 million. These decreases were
offset by the increase in cost of sales due to the increase in the number of employees and
subcontractor costs related to the DIRECTV® business. In addition, insurance expense
increased in the year ended December 31, 2004 due to the increased number of claims reported. As a
result of the increased claims and loss history since the beginning of 2004, we adjusted our
actuarial assumptions and increased our reserves and expenses by $13.2 million in the year ended
December 31, 2004.
Depreciation. Depreciation was $17.1 million or 1.9% of revenue for the year ended December
31, 2004, compared to $27.6 million or 3.3% of revenue for the same period in 2003, representing a
decrease of $10.5 million or 38%. We reduced depreciation expense in the year ended December 31,
2004 by continuing to reduce capital expenditures, disposing of excess equipment in 2003 and 2004
and placing greater reliance on operating leases to meet our equipment needs.
General and administrative. General and administrative expenses were $74.6 million or 8.2% of
revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to $70.1 million or 8.6% of revenue for the
same period in 2003, representing an increase of $4.5 million or 6.3%. The increase in general and
administrative expenses was due to additional professional fees incurred in the year ended December
31, 2004 in the amount of $4.3 million related to the audit and quarterly reviews, increased audit
fees in connection
13
with our Sarbanes-Oxley compliance, increased consulting fees related to Sarbanes-Oxley
compliance and an increase in legal fees related to our defense in various litigation matters. In
addition, in 2004 we recorded $644,000 of non-cash stock compensation expense mainly related to the
extension of the exercise period on certain stock options held by former employees. There was no
such expense in 2003.
Interest expense, net. Interest expense, net of interest income, remained consistent at $19.5
million or 2.1% of revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to $19.2 million or 2.3%
of revenue for the same period in 2003.
Other income, net. Other income was $191,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared
to $1.2 million for the same period in 2003 representing a decrease of $1.0 million or 84.6%. In
the year ended December 31, 2003, we sold more equipment at auction and recognized more gains on
these sales than in the year ended December 31, 2004.
Benefit for income taxes. For 2004 and 2003 our effective tax rates were approximately 0% and
25%, respectively. Our balance sheet as of December 31, 2004, includes a net deferred tax asset of
$56.8 million of which $44.3 million relates to federal taxes and the remainder to various state
and foreign taxes, net of valuation allowance. The realization of this net deferred tax asset is
dependent upon our ability to generate future pretax income. We anticipate that we will generate
sufficient pretax income in the future to realize a portion of our net deferred tax asset relating
to federal income taxes. In making this assessment, we have considered our projected future pretax
income based upon a prudent and feasible tax planning strategy available to us involving the sale
of one of our divisions. However, this tax planning strategy does not appear viable for the purpose
of realizing all of the various income tax components of our net deferred tax asset. Accordingly,
we recorded an addition to our valuation allowance of $24.1 million in 2004 to reduce certain of
our net deferred Federal, foreign and state tax assets at December 31, 2004, to their estimated net
realizable value of $56.8 million. The primary reason for the difference in our effective tax rate
from 2003 to 2004 was the effect of worthless stock deduction and increase in valuation allowance.
Deferred tax assets, net in 2004 increased to $56.8 million from $55.3 million. The increase
in deferred tax assets, net was due to a reduction in deferred tax assets of $3.6 million and a
reduction in deferred tax liabilities of $5.2 million. The decrease in deferred tax assets was
primarily related to our increase in net operating loss carryforwards of $11.9 million as a result
of our net loss in 2004, and an increase in deferred tax assets relating to accrued self insurance
of $10.6 million offset by a decrease in deferred tax assets relating to goodwill of $2.5 million
and an increase in the valuation allowance of $24.1 million for Federal, foreign and state tax
assets. The reduction in deferred tax liabilities was primarily due to a decrease in deferred tax
liabilities for property and equipment of $1.9 million and a decrease in deferred tax liabilities
for accounts receivable retainage differences of $2.7 million.
Minority interest. Minority interest was $0.3 million or 0.04% of revenue for the year ended
December 31, 2004, compared to $0 for the same period in 2003. We entered into a joint venture
with a third party at the end of 2003. We own 51% of the company. This subsidiary had net income
for the year ended December 31, 2004 which resulted in minority interest.
Discontinued operations. In the year ended December 31, 2004, we ceased performing
contractual services for clients in Brazil, abandoned all assets of our Brazil subsidiary and made
a determination to exit the Brazil market. The abandoned Brazil subsidiary has been classified as a
discontinued operation and its net loss is not included in the results of continuing operations in
2004 or 2003. The results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2003 for Brazil have been
reclassified to a loss from discontinued operations. During the year ended December 31, 2004, we
wrote off approximately $12.3 million and the net investment in the Brazil subsidiary of
approximately $6.8 million which consisted of the accumulated foreign currency translation loss of
$21.3 million less a net deficit in assets of $14.5 million. The net loss for the Brazil
subsidiary was $20.2 million and $21.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively. In November 2004, our subsidiary applied for relief and was adjudicated bankrupt by
a Brazilian bankruptcy court. The subsidiary is currently being liquidated under court
supervision. During the fourth quarter 2004, we ceased performing services and committed to sell
our Network Services division and exit this service market. This division has been classified as a
discontinued operation and its net loss is not included in the results of continuing operations in
2004 or 2003. The results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2003 for Network Services
have been reclassified to a loss from discontinued operations. The net loss for the Network
Services division was $3.0 million and $6.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively.
Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2003 and 2002
Revenue. Our revenue was $827.5 for the year ended December 31, 2003 compared to $766.5
million for the same period in 2002, representing an increase of $61.0 million. The increase in
revenue was primarily due to the growth in our broadband revenue and, to a lesser extent, growth in
business with our energy and government clients. We experienced a 74.5% increase in revenue from
14
broadband customers such as Comcast and DIRECTV® for upgrade construction and
residential installation work. Overall revenue from broadband customers grew by $113.3 million in
2003. Revenue from energy clients grew by $35.8 million in 2003 to $198.6 million compared to
$162.8 million in 2002 primarily due to new gas pipeline and electrical substation contracts. Our
revenue from government work increased by $10.6 million in 2003 compared to 2002 due to an increase
in dollar value of projects and expansion of the business into new states in 2003. Our overall 2003
revenue growth was reduced by a $98.8 million decrease in telecommunications revenue. Historically,
we have derived a significant amount of our revenue from telecommunications clients. Commencing in
the latter part of 2001 and throughout 2002, certain segments of the telecommunications industry
suffered a severe downturn that resulted in a number of our clients filing for bankruptcy
protection or experiencing financial difficulties. The downturn resulted in reduced capital
expenditures for infrastructure projects, even among clients that did not experience financial
difficulties. Revenue from telecommunication clients continued their downward trend in 2003.
Costs of revenue. Our costs of revenue was $744.6 million or 90.0% of revenue for the year
ended December 31, 2003, compared to $683.9 million or 89.2% of revenue for the same period in
2002. Costs of revenue grew in terms of total dollars in 2003 due to the overall increase in
revenue and a slight increase in payroll. Costs of revenue in 2003 include $28.7 million in losses
incurred on construction projects during the year. These losses arose from project costs that
exceeded our expectations for a variety of reasons including internal bid, project management and
cost estimation issues, errors in specifications and designs, work outside of original contract
scope and customer-caused delays.
Depreciation. Depreciation was $27.6 million or 3.3% of revenue for the year ended December
31, 2003, compared to $33.8 million or 4.4% of revenue for the same period in 2002, representing a
decrease of $6.2 million or 18.3%. In 2003, depreciation expense was reduced by $5.8 million
related to the change in estimate in useful lives that occurred on November 30, 2002. In addition,
we reduced depreciation expense in 2003 by continuing to reduce capital expenditures, disposing of
excess equipment and placing greater reliance on operating leases to meet our equipment needs.
General and administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses were $70.1 million
or 8.5% of revenue for the year ended December 31, 2003 compared to $107.4 million or 14.0% of
revenue for the same period in 2002, representing a decrease of $37.3 million or 34.7%. The
decrease mainly relates to a decrease of $27.0 million related to our restructuring plan which
resulted in the termination of employees, consolidation of facilities, functions and locations, and
the recording of restructuring charges in 2002. In addition, bad debt expense included in general
and administrative expense declined by approximately $10.8 million from 2002 to 2003. The large
provision in 2002 was related to the after effects in 2002 related to clients declaring bankruptcy
in 2001 in the telecommunications sector.
Interest expense. Interest expense, net of interest income, was $19.2 million or 2.3% of
revenue for the year ended December 31, 2003, compared to $18.3 million or 2.4% for the same period
in 2002 representing an increase of $874,000. Net interest costs grew as our average borrowings
increased to support working capital needs. We incur interest expense primarily from our long-term
subordinated debt which carries a fixed rate and to a lesser extent on periodic credit line
borrowings to meet working capital needs and support various letters of credit.
Other (expense) income. Other income was $1.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2003
compared to other expense of $10 million for the same period in 2002. Other (expense) income in
both years includes a gain on disposal of certain non-core assets and investments. During the year
2002, the gain was offset by a $13.2 million valuation allowance to reduce the carrying value of
certain assets held for sale, long lived assets in use and investments. During 2003, the gain was
slightly offset by the settlement of litigation of approximately $2.3 million and the write-off of
certain non-core assets and investments.
Income taxes. For 2003 and 2002, our effective tax rates were approximately 25% and 35%,
respectively. Our balance sheet as of December 31, 2003, includes a net deferred tax asset of $55.3
million of which $41.9 million relates to federal taxes and the remainder to various state and
foreign taxes, net of valuation allowance. The realization of this net deferred tax asset is
dependent upon our ability to generate future pretax income. We anticipate that we will generate
sufficient pretax income in the future to realize the portion of our net deferred tax asset
relating to federal income taxes. In making this assessment, we have considered our projected
future pretax income based upon a prudent and feasible tax planning strategy available to us
involving the sale of one of our divisions. However, this tax planning strategy does not appear
viable for the purpose of realizing all of the various state income tax components of our net
deferred tax asset. Accordingly, we recorded an addition to our valuation allowance of $3.4
million in 2003 to reduce certain of our net deferred state tax assets at December 31, 2003, to
their estimated net realizable value of $55.3 million. We also recorded a valuation provision for
state deferred taxes in 2002. However, this 2002 provision was less material to our overall
deferred benefit in 2002. The primary reason for the difference in our effective tax rate from
2002 to 2003 was the effect of non-US operations; specifically losses from our operations in Mexico
and Brazil for which we recorded no tax benefit.
15
Deferred tax assets, net in 2003 increased to $55.3 million from $46.7 million. The increase
in deferred tax assets, net was due to an increase in deferred tax assets of $6.8 million and a
reduction in deferred tax liabilities of $1.8 million. The increase in deferred tax assets was
primarily related to our net operating loss carryforwards of $23.6 million as a result of our net
loss in 2003, offset by a decrease in deferred tax assets relating to goodwill of $12.4 million and
an increase in the valuation allowance of $3.4 million for state tax assets. The reduction in
deferred tax liabilities was primarily due to an increase in deferred tax liabilities for property
and equipment of $4 million offset by a decrease in deferred tax liabilities for other temporary
differences of $4.3 million.
Discontinued operations. In the year ended December 31, 2004, we ceased performing
contractual services for customers in Brazil, abandoned all assets of our Brazil subsidiary and
made a determination to exit the Brazil market. The abandoned Brazil subsidiary has been
classified as a discontinued operation. The results of operations for the years ended December 31,
2003 and 2002 have been reclassified to loss from discontinued operations. The net (loss) income
for the Brazil subsidiary was $(21.8) million and $1.2 million for the years ended December 31,
2003 and 2002, respectively. The net loss in 2003 was due to a number of labor claims that were
brought by ex-employees against our Brazil operations in 2003.We recorded $9.8 million of expense
related to employment claims filed in Brazil in the year ended December 31, 2003 which also
resulted in increased legal fees. In addition, we reserved $4.1 million in receivable balances due
to the uncertainty of collection in 2003. In the year ended December 31, 2004, we also ceased
performing services and committed to sell our Network Services division and exit this service
market. This division has been classified as a discontinued operation. The results of operations
for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 have been reclassified to loss from discontinued
operations. The net loss for the Network Services division was $6.0 million and $17.9 million for
the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The net loss in 2002 included $13.1
million of a one-time, non-cash charge to reduce the carrying value of goodwill related to the
cumulative effect of an accounting change upon adoption of SFAS No. 142.
Financial Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our primary sources of liquidity are cash flows from continuing operations, borrowings under
revolving lines of credit, and proceeds from sales of assets and investments. We expect to
continue selling vehicles and equipment as we see the need to upgrade with new equipment. We
expect to continue to obtain proceeds from these sales in excess of $1.0 million per quarter
depending upon market conditions. Our primary liquidity needs are for working capital, capital
expenditures, letters of credit and debt service. In addition to ordinary course working capital
requirements, we will continue to spend at least $10.0 to $15.0 million per year on capital
expenditures in order to keep our equipment new and in good condition. We also expect our annual
lease payments to increase as we place greater reliance on operating leases to meet our equipment
needs. Interest payments of approximately $7.6 million are due each February and August under our
subordinated debt agreement. In 2004, we purchased a 49% interest in a limited liability company
with an established marketing group. The initial investment of $3.7 million will be paid over four
quarters which commenced in the third quarter of 2004 with additional contingent payments of up to
$1.3 million per quarter based upon the level of unit sales and profitability of the limited
liability company for the two years following the period after the initial investment is fully
funded.
We anticipate that funds generated from continuing operations, together with borrowings under
our credit facility, and proceeds from sales of assets and investments will be sufficient to meet
our working capital requirements, anticipated capital expenditures, letters of credit and debt
service obligations for at least the next twelve months.
We need working capital to support seasonal variations in our business, primarily due to the
impact of weather conditions on external construction and maintenance work, and the corresponding
spending by our clients on their annual capital expenditure budgets. Our business is slower in the
first and fourth quarters of each calendar year and stronger in the second and third quarters. We
generally experience seasonal working capital needs from approximately April through September to
support growth in unbilled revenue and accounts receivable, and to a lesser extent, inventory. Our
billing terms are generally net 30 to 60 days, although some contracts allow our clients to retain
a portion (from 2% to 15%) of the contract amount until the contract is completed to their
satisfaction. We maintain inventory to meet the material requirements of some of our contracts.
Some of our clients pay us in advance for a portion of the materials we purchase for their
projects, or allow us to pre-bill them for materials purchases up to a specified amount.
Our vendors generally offer us terms ranging from 30 to 90 days. Our agreements with
subcontractors usually contain a pay-when-paid provision, whereby our payments to subcontractors
are made after we are paid by our clients.
As of December 31, 2004, we had $134.1 million in working capital compared to $113.4 million
as of December 31, 2003. The increase in working capital was due to an increase in inventory and a
decrease in current maturities of long-term debt offset by a
16
decrease in accounts receivable. The decrease in accounts receivable was the result of a
successful collections effort in the fourth quarter of 2004. The decrease in current maturities of
long-term debt resulted in the payoff of all long-term debt obligations except for the 7.75% senior
subordinated notes. The increase in inventory was due to the growth in our DIRECTV®
business and the fact that in October 2003 DIRECTV® ceased providing inventory on
consignment, requiring us to purchase inventory from DIRECTV®. As a result, as our
DIRECTV® business increases, our inventory will also increase. Cash and cash
equivalents remained consistent from $19.4 million at December 31, 2003 to $19.5 million at
December 31, 2004. At December 31, 2004, the cash balance includes $5.0 million in restricted cash
related to collateral on our revolving credit facility.
Net cash provided by operating activities from continuing operations was $5.4 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004 compared to $7.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The
net cash provided by operating activities from continuing operations in 2004 was primarily related
to timing of cash collections from customers and payments to vendors offset by the loss from
continuing operations. The net cash provided by operating activities from continuing operations in
2003 was primarily related to the loss from continuing operations offset by timing of cash
collections from customers and payments to vendors and receipts of $28.1 million in income tax
refunds resulting from losses incurred in 2002.
Net cash used in investing activities of continuing operations was $4.1 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 compared to cash provided by investing activities of continuing operations
of $7.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The net cash used in investing activities
from continuing operations in 2004 was related to capital expenditures in the amount of $9.3
million and investment in life insurance policies for our key executive officers of $1.8 million.
In addition, we acquired a 49% interest in a company in 2004. Our investment to date amounts to
$1.1 million. The payments were offset by net proceeds from sales of assets of $8.1 million. Net
cash provided by investing activities from continuing operations in 2003 primarily related to $22.3
million in net proceeds from sales of assets offset by capital expenditures in the amount of $11.0
million and investment in life insurance policies to our key executive officers in the amount of
$1.8 million, and approximately $1.9 million in contingent consideration paid related to
acquisitions.
Net cash used in financing activities from continuing operations was $1.0 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 compared to $1.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. Net cash
used in financing activities from continuing operations was primarily related to issuance of common
stock offset by repayments of borrowings and capital lease payments.
We have a revolving credit facility for our North American operations that provides for
borrowings up to an aggregate of $125.0 million. The amount that we can borrow at any given time
is based upon a formula that takes into account, among other things, eligible billed and unbilled
accounts receivable, which can result in borrowing availability of less than the full amount of the
facility. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, net availability under the credit facility totaled
$25.5 million and $37.9 million, net of outstanding standby letters of credit aggregating $66.8
million and $54.5 million, respectively. At December 31, 2004, $63.3 million of the outstanding
letters of credit are issued to support our casualty insurance requirements or surety needs. These
letters of credit mature at various dates through December 31, 2005, and except for Letters of
Credit totaling $10.0 million, most have automatic renewal provisions subject to prior notice of
cancellation. We had no outstanding draws under the credit facility on December 31, 2004 and 2003.
The revolving credit facility matures on January 22, 2007. The revolving credit facility is
collateralized by a first priority security interest in substantially all of our North American
assets including $5.0 million in restricted cash which is included in cash and cash equivalents at
December 31, 2004 and a pledge of the stock of certain of our operating subsidiaries. All wholly
owned subsidiaries collateralize the facility. Interest under the facility accrues at rates based,
at our option, on the agent banks base rate plus a margin of between 0.75% and 1.75% or its LIBOR
rate (as defined in the credit facility) plus a margin of between 2.25% and 3.25%, each margin
depending on certain financial thresholds. The facility includes an unused facility fee of 0.50%,
which may be adjusted to as low as 0.375% or as high as 0.625% depending on the amount of the total
commitment which is unused.
The revolving credit facility contains customary events of default (including cross-default)
provisions and covenants related to our North American operations that prohibit, among other
things, making investments and acquisitions in excess of a specified amount, incurring additional
indebtedness in excess of a specified amount, paying cash dividends, making other distributions in
excess of a specified amount, making capital expenditures in excess of a specified amount, creating
liens against our assets, prepaying other indebtedness including our 7.75% senior subordinated
notes, and engaging in certain mergers or combinations without the prior written consent of the
lenders. In addition, any deterioration in the quality of billed and unbilled receivables would
reduce availability under our revolving credit facility.
We are required to be in compliance with certain financial covenants measured on a monthly
basis. As a result of our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2004, we were not in compliance
with a monthly financial covenant, the fixed charge coverage ratio, of the credit facility at
December 31, 2004. The credit facility was amended on March 17, 2005 modifying this covenant and
other
17
financial covenants and we were in compliance with our amended credit facilitys financial
covenants at December 31, 2004. Under the amended agreement, our North American operations must
maintain minimum tangible net worth equal to:
|
§ |
|
$45 million at December 31, 2004; |
|
|
§ |
|
$40 million from January 31 through May 31, 2005; |
|
|
§ |
|
$45 million from June 30 through August 31, 2005; |
|
|
§ |
|
$53.5 million from September 30 through November 30, 2005; then |
|
|
§ |
|
$53.5 million beginning December 1, 2005; plus 50% of the consolidated net income of our
operations from December 1, 2005 through the date of determination. |
Since April 1, 2004, our North American Operations was also required to maintain a minimum
fixed charge coverage ratio, computed on a monthly basis, beginning in May 2004. The fixed charge
coverage ratio is generally defined to mean the ratio of our net income before interest expense,
income tax expense, depreciation expense, and amortization expense plus $1.1 million to
consolidated interest expense and current maturities of debt for the period of determination. For
the purposes of determining the current maturities of long-term debt during the period from April
2004 through March 2005 used in determining the fixed charge coverage ratio the amount of current
maturities of long term debt as of any month during this period is multiplied by a fraction, the
numerator of which is the number of cumulative months since April 2004, and the denominator of
which is 12.
Current ratio requirements are:
|
|
|
|
|
Period |
|
Ratio |
For the 9 month period ending December 31, 2004 |
|
|
1.50 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 10 and 11 month periods ending January 31 and February 28, 2005 |
|
|
1.15 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending March 31, April 30 and May 31, 2005 |
|
|
1.20 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending June 30, July 31, and August 31, 2005 |
|
|
1.25 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending on September 30, October 31, and November 30, 2005 |
|
|
1.50 to 1.00 |
|
For the 12 month period ending on December 31, 2005 and each 12 month period ending on the last
day of each calendar month thereafter |
|
|
2.00 to 1.00 |
|
Based upon our projections for 2005, we believe we will be in compliance with the amended
credit facilitys financial covenants for 2005. We are dependent upon borrowings and letters of
credit under this credit facility to fund operations. Should we be unable to comply with the terms
and covenants of the amended credit facility, we would be required to obtain further modifications
of the credit facility or another source of financing to continue to operate. We may not be able
to achieve our 2005 projections and thus may not be in compliance with the amended credit
facilitys financial covenants in 2005.
As of December 31, 2004, we have outstanding $195.9 million, 7.75% senior subordinated notes
due in February 2008, with interest due semi-annually. The notes also contain default (including
cross-default) provisions and covenants restricting many of the same transactions as under our
credit facility. The indenture which governs our 7.75% senior subordinated notes allows us to
incur the following additional indebtedness: the credit facility (up to $150 million), renewals to
existing debt permitted under the indenture plus an additional $25 million of indebtedness. The
indenture prohibits incurring further indebtedness unless our fixed charge coverage ratio is at
least 2:1 for the four most recently ended fiscal quarters determined on a proforma basis as if
that additional debt has been incurred at the beginning of the period. The definition of our fixed
charge coverage ratio under the indenture is essentially equivalent to that under our credit
agreement.
Our credit standing and senior subordinated notes are rated by various agencies. In August
2004, Standard & Poors withdrew its rating of our corporate credit, senior secured and
subordinated debt. In its press release, Standard & Poors stated that the withdrawal was due to
insufficient financial information available to support a ratings opinion due to the delays in our
Form 10-Q filings in 2004. This withdrawal has not had an impact on our liquidity or ability to
obtain necessary financing.
In 2003, we performed work on undocumented or unapproved change orders or other matters which
are being disputed by our clients. We did not recognize this work as revenue in 2003 or in the year
ended December 31, 2004. However, expenses for the work associated with these change orders and
other matters were included in costs of revenue in 2003 resulting in a 45% decline in our 2003
18
margins. This has also affected our liquidity since we still have not been paid for the work
performed. We have commenced legal action against some of our clients in connection with work
performed in 2003. In addition, we have made claims for amounts in excess of the agreed contract
price (or amounts not included in the original contract price) that we seek to collect from
customers for delays we believe were caused by the customer, errors in specifications and designs,
change orders in dispute or unapproved as to both scope and price, or other causes of unanticipated
additional costs. Our customers may counterclaim against us for contract damages, liquidated
damages and/or indemnification. If the customers can establish a contract entitlement, that
entitlement could reduce any amounts otherwise due us from the customer (including any remaining
outstanding accounts receivable from the customer under the contract price) and/or create
liabilities for us. Should we be successful in collecting some of these claims we would recognize
them as revenue when received. When revenue is recognized the margins will increase during such
period of recognition since the costs have already been recorded. However, we may not be
successful in collecting any of these claims.
In the second quarter of 2004, purported class action complaints were filed against us and
certain of our officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida
and one was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. These
cases have been consolidated by court order in the Southern District of Florida. The complaints
allege certain violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, related to current and prior period earnings reports. On January 25, 2005, a motion for
leave to file a Second Amended Compliant was filed by Plaintiffs which the Court granted.
Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint on February 22, 2005. Plaintiffs contend that our
financial statements during the purported class period of August 12, 2003 to May 11, 2004 were
materially misleading in the following areas: 1) the financials for the third quarter of 2003 were
allegedly overstated by $5.8 million in revenue from unapproved change orders from a variety of our
projects; and 2) the financials for the second quarter of 2003 were overstated by some $1.3
million as a result of the intentional overstatement of revenue, inventories and work in progress
at our Canadian subsidiary. Plaintiffs seek damages, not quantified, for the difference between
the stock price plaintiffs paid and the stock price plaintiffs believe they should have paid, plus
interest and attorney fees. We believe the claims are without merit. We will vigorously defend
these lawsuits but may be unable to successfully resolve these disputes without incurring
significant expenses.
The following table sets forth our contractual commitments as of December 31, 2004 and our
anticipated payment obligations during the periods indicated below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due By Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More than |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 Years and |
Contractual Obligations (1) |
|
Total |
|
1 Year |
|
1-3 Years |
|
3-5 Years |
|
Thereafter |
Senior subordinated notes |
|
$ |
195,915 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
195,915 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Notes payable for equipment |
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
Equity investment |
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital leases |
|
|
1,834 |
|
|
|
497 |
|
|
|
792 |
|
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leases |
|
|
74,079 |
|
|
|
28,707 |
|
|
|
34,600 |
|
|
|
7,239 |
|
|
|
3,533 |
|
Executive life insurance |
|
|
17,744 |
|
|
|
1,784 |
|
|
|
2,569 |
|
|
|
2,569 |
|
|
|
10,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
292,590 |
|
|
$ |
33,862 |
|
|
$ |
38,093 |
|
|
$ |
206,280 |
|
|
$ |
14,355 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts do not include interest payments. We estimate that we will pay an additional
$15.4 million and $15.2 million in 2005 and each of the years between 2006 and 2008, respectively
in interest payments for our senior subordinated notes and revolving credit facilities |
Off-balance sheet arrangements
We provide letters of credit to secure our obligations primarily related to our insurance
arrangements and surety bonds. We also provide letters of credit related to legal matters. Total
letters of credit reduce our available borrowings under our credit facility and amounted to $66.8
million at December 31, 2004 of which $63.3 million were related to insurance matters and surety
bond requirements.
Some of our contracts require us to provide performance and payment bonds, which we obtain
from a surety company. If we were unable to meet our contractual obligations to a client and the
surety paid our client the amount due under the bond, the surety would seek reimbursement of such
payment from us. At December 31, 2004, performance and payment bonds outstanding on our behalf
totaled $117.9 million.
Seasonality
19
Our operations are historically slower in the first and fourth quarters of the year. This
seasonality is primarily the result of client budgetary constraints and preferences and the effect
of winter weather on our external activities. Some of our clients tend to complete budgeted
capital expenditures before the end of the year and defer additional expenditures until the
following budget year.
Impact of Inflation
The primary inflationary factor affecting our operations is increased labor costs. We did not
experience significant increases in labor costs in 2003 or 2004. To a lesser extent, we are also
affected by increases in fuel costs which increased significantly in 2004 and are expected to
continue to increase in 2005.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
On December 17, 2003, the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission published Staff
Accounting Bulletin 104, Revenue Recognition, (SAB 104) to revise or rescind portions of the
interpretative guidance included in Topic 13 of the codification of staff accounting bulletins in
order to make this interpretive guidance consistent with current authoritative accounting and
auditing guidance and SEC rules and regulations. The principal revisions relate to the rescission
of material no longer necessary because of private sector developments in U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles. The adoption of SAB 104 during December 2003 did not have a material effect
on our results of operations or financial position.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123R which requires the measurement of all employee
share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, using a
fair-value-based method and the recording of such expense in our consolidated statements of
operations. The accounting provisions of SFAS 123R are effective for reporting periods beginning
after June 15, 2005. We are required to adopt SFAS 123R in the third quarter of fiscal 2005. The
pro forma disclosures previously permitted under SFAS 123 no longer will be an alternative to
financial statement recognition. See Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1 Stock
Based Compensation for the pro forma net loss and net loss per share amounts, for 2002 through
2004, as if we had used a fair-value-based method similar to the methods required under SFAS 123R
to measure compensation expense for employee stock incentive awards. Although we have not yet
determined whether the adoption of SFAS 123R will result in amounts that are similar to the current
pro forma disclosures under SFAS 123, we are evaluating the requirements under SFAS 123R and expect
the adoption to have a significant adverse impact on our consolidated statements of operations.
In March 2004, the FASB issued EITF Issue No. 03-1 (EITF 03-1), The Meaning of
Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments which provided new
guidance for assessing impairment losses on investments. Additionally, EITF 03-1 includes new
disclosure requirements for investments that are deemed to be temporarily impaired. In September
2004, the FASB delayed the accounting provisions of EITF 03-1; however the disclosure requirements
remain effective for annual periods ending after June 15, 2004. We will evaluate the impact of
EITF 03-1 once final guidance is issued.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153, Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets. This
Statement amends the guidance in APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions (APB
29). APB 29 provided an exception to the basic measurement principle (fair value) for exchanges
of similar assets, requiring that some nonmonetary exchanges be recorded on a carryover basis.
SFAS 153 eliminates the exception to fair value for exchanges of similar productive assets and
replaces it with a general exception for exchange transactions that do not have commercial
substance, that is, transactions that are not expected to result in significant changes in the cash
flows of the reporting entity. The provisions of SFAS 153 are effective for exchanges of
nonmonetary assets occurring in fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2005. We believe that SFAS
153 will have no significant effect on our financial position, results of operations, and cash
flows.
20
Item 8. Financial Statements
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
Report of Independent Certified Registered Public Accounting
Firm |
|
|
45 |
|
Report of Independent Certified Registered Public Accounting
Firm |
|
|
46 |
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Years Ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 |
|
|
47 |
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2003 and
2004 |
|
|
48 |
|
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders Equity
for the Years Ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 |
|
|
49 |
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 |
|
|
50 |
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
|
51 |
|
21
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and
Shareholders of MasTec, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of MasTec, Inc. and subsidiaries
as of December 31, 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in
shareholders equity, and cash flows for the year then ended. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles
used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial position of MasTec, Inc. as of December 31, 2004, and the
consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for the year then ended in conformity
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
We also have audited, in accordance with the Standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the effectiveness of MasTecs Inc. internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) and
our report dated March 29, 2005 which expressed a qualified opinion thereon.
/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP
Miami, Florida
March 29, 2005
22
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and
Shareholders of MasTec, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of MasTec, Inc. as of December
31, 2002 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders equity, and
cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2003 (as restated See Note
2). These financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles
used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial position of MasTec, Inc. at December 31, 2003 and the
consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the two years in the
period ended December 31, 2003 (as restated), in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Miami, Florida
July 23, 2004, except for
Note 10, as to which the
date is March 30, 2005
23
MASTEC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
|
(In thousands except per share amounts) |
Revenue |
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding depreciation |
|
|
683,855 |
|
|
|
744,587 |
|
|
|
828,743 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
33,760 |
|
|
|
27,586 |
|
|
|
17,099 |
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
107,446 |
|
|
|
70,112 |
|
|
|
74,550 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
79,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net of interest income |
|
|
18,306 |
|
|
|
19,180 |
|
|
|
19,478 |
|
Other (expense) income, net |
|
|
(9,973 |
) |
|
|
1,242 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle, benefit for income taxes and
minority interest |
|
|
(166,583 |
) |
|
|
(32,743 |
) |
|
|
(25,884 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes |
|
|
59,345 |
|
|
|
8,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
Minority Interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(333 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle |
|
|
(107,238 |
) |
|
|
(24,440 |
) |
|
|
(26,217 |
) |
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle |
|
|
(12,596 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(119,834 |
) |
|
|
(24,440 |
) |
|
|
(26,217 |
) |
Discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on write-off of assets of discontinued operations, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19,165 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
(16,722 |
) |
|
|
(27,859 |
) |
|
|
(4,055 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,437 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
(2.50 |
) |
|
$ |
(.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(.54 |
) |
Discontinued operations |
|
|
(0.35 |
) |
|
|
(.58 |
) |
|
|
(.48 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total basic and diluted net loss per share |
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares
outstanding |
|
|
47,922 |
|
|
|
48,084 |
|
|
|
48,382 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share before cumulative effect
of change in accounting principle |
|
$ |
(2.59 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle |
|
|
(0.26 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share |
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
24
MASTEC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
|
(In thousands, except shares) |
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
19,415 |
|
|
$ |
19,548 |
|
Accounts receivable, unbilled revenue and retainage, net |
|
|
208,211 |
|
|
|
200,743 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
32,781 |
|
|
|
45,293 |
|
Income tax refund receivable |
|
|
4,667 |
|
|
|
2,846 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
31,801 |
|
|
|
43,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
296,875 |
|
|
|
312,258 |
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
85,832 |
|
|
|
69,303 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
150,984 |
|
|
|
138,640 |
|
Deferred taxes, net |
|
|
55,083 |
|
|
|
50,732 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
39,489 |
|
|
|
33,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
628,263 |
|
|
$ |
604,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current maturities of debt |
|
$ |
4,709 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
100,698 |
|
|
|
113,333 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
78,108 |
|
|
|
64,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
183,515 |
|
|
|
178,128 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
31,974 |
|
|
|
38,678 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
196,956 |
|
|
|
196,059 |
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, no par value; authorized shares
5,000,000; issued and outstanding shares none |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock $0.10 par value; authorized shares
100,000,000; issued and outstanding shares 48,222,000 in 2003 and
48,597,000 in 2004 |
|
|
4,822 |
|
|
|
4,860 |
|
Capital surplus |
|
|
349,823 |
|
|
|
353,033 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(117,847 |
) |
|
|
(167,284 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income |
|
|
(20,980 |
) |
|
|
544 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
215,818 |
|
|
|
191,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
628,263 |
|
|
$ |
604,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
25
MASTEC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
(In Thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained |
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
Capital |
|
(Accumulated |
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Shares |
|
Amount |
|
Surplus |
|
Deficit) |
|
(Loss) Income |
|
Total |
|
Income (Loss) |
Balance December 31, 2001, as
restated |
|
|
47,905 |
|
|
$ |
4,791 |
|
|
$ |
348,022 |
|
|
$ |
71,008 |
|
|
$ |
(20,006 |
) |
|
$ |
403,815 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss, as restated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(136,556 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(136,556 |
) |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
Foreign currency translation
adjustment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,556 |
) |
|
|
(4,556 |
) |
|
|
(4,556 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss for
period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(141,112 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock issued, primarily for
stock options exercised |
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2002, as
restated |
|
|
48,006 |
|
|
$ |
4,801 |
|
|
$ |
348,319 |
|
|
$ |
(65,548 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,562 |
) |
|
$ |
263,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(52,299 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(52,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,299 |
) |
Foreign currency translation
adjustment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,582 |
|
|
|
3,582 |
|
|
|
3,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss for
period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(48,717 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock issued, primarily for
stock options exercised |
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
1,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tax benefit resulting from
stock option plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2003 |
|
|
48,222 |
|
|
$ |
4,822 |
|
|
$ |
349,823 |
|
|
$ |
(117,847 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,980 |
) |
|
$ |
215,818 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,437 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,437 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,437 |
) |
Foreign currency translation
adjustment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,524 |
|
|
|
21,524 |
|
|
|
21,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non cash stock compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss for period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(27,913 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock issued, primarily for
stock options exercised |
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
1,840 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,878 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tax benefit resulting from
stock option plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2004 |
|
|
48,597 |
|
|
$ |
4,860 |
|
|
$ |
353,033 |
|
|
$ |
(167,284 |
) |
|
$ |
544 |
|
|
$ |
191,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
26
MASTEC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities of continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(119,834 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,440 |
) |
|
$ |
(26,217 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss from continuing operations to net cash
provided by operating activities of continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
34,643 |
|
|
|
28,220 |
|
|
|
17,588 |
|
Non-cash stock and restricted stock compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
(Gain) loss on disposal of assets and investments |
|
|
(5,441 |
) |
|
|
(5,562 |
) |
|
|
(161 |
) |
Provision for doubtful accounts |
|
|
15,088 |
|
|
|
4,278 |
|
|
|
5,086 |
|
Write-down of assets |
|
|
20,375 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,020 |
|
Income tax refunds |
|
|
53,414 |
|
|
|
28,121 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
Provision for inventory obsolescence |
|
|
5,203 |
|
|
|
1,837 |
|
|
|
902 |
|
Cumulative change in accounting principle, net |
|
|
12,596 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
79,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333 |
|
Deferred income tax benefit |
|
|
(51,844 |
) |
|
|
(5,140 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities net of effect of acquisitions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, unbilled revenue and retainage, net |
|
|
29,568 |
|
|
|
(31,678 |
) |
|
|
(240 |
) |
Inventories |
|
|
(8,484 |
) |
|
|
(11,997 |
) |
|
|
(13,786 |
) |
Other assets, current and non-current portion |
|
|
(17,181 |
) |
|
|
(14,736 |
) |
|
|
(2,211 |
) |
Accounts payable |
|
|
(4,951 |
) |
|
|
34,404 |
|
|
|
13,763 |
|
Other liabilities, current and non-current portion |
|
|
11,911 |
|
|
|
3,687 |
|
|
|
7,509 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations |
|
|
54,773 |
|
|
|
6,994 |
|
|
|
5,406 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows (used in) provided by investing activities of continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
(18,925 |
) |
|
|
(10,961 |
) |
|
|
(9,310 |
) |
Cash paid for acquisitions and contingent consideration, net of cash acquired |
|
|
(17,269 |
) |
|
|
(1,861 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Investments in unconsolidated companies partner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(275 |
) |
|
|
(1,092 |
) |
Investment in life insurance policies |
|
|
(1,840 |
) |
|
|
(1,803 |
) |
|
|
(1,785 |
) |
Net proceeds from sale of assets and investments |
|
|
13,891 |
|
|
|
22,253 |
|
|
|
8,065 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities of continuing operations |
|
|
(24,143 |
) |
|
|
7,353 |
|
|
|
(4,122 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows used in financing activities of continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments proceeds from revolving credit facilities, net |
|
|
(70,693 |
) |
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds repayments from other borrowings, net |
|
|
(414 |
) |
|
|
(510 |
) |
|
|
(3,283 |
) |
Payments of capital lease obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,068 |
) |
|
|
(363 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of common stock |
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
2,643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities of continuing operations |
|
|
(70,797 |
) |
|
|
(1,187 |
) |
|
|
(1,003 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(40,167 |
) |
|
|
13,160 |
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net effect of translation on cash |
|
|
2,465 |
|
|
|
(1,922 |
) |
|
|
432 |
|
Cash and cash equivalentsbeginning of period |
|
|
48,478 |
|
|
|
8,730 |
|
|
|
19,415 |
|
Cash used in discontinued operations |
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
(553 |
) |
|
|
(580 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalentsend of period |
|
$ |
8,730 |
|
|
$ |
19,415 |
|
|
$ |
19,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
19,576 |
|
|
$ |
15,504 |
|
|
$ |
17,643 |
|
Income taxes |
|
$ |
1,555 |
|
|
$ |
155 |
|
|
$ |
68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental non-cash disclosures: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in unconsolidated companies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,775 |
|
As of December 31, 2002, approximately $1.9 million was accrued for contingent
consideration earned in that year for acquisitions consummated in prior periods. The Company
subsequently paid the $1.9 million contingent consideration amounts during the years ended December
31, 2003.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
27
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 1 Nature of the Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
MasTec, Inc. (collectively, with its subsidiaries, MasTec or the Company) serves providers
of telecommunications, broadband (including cable, satellite and high speed Internet), energy
services, traffic control and homeland security systems throughout many parts of North America.
Although the Companys clients may contract for a full range of services, the Companys offerings
are more typically separated into the construction, design and installation or the maintenance and
upgrade, of infrastructure. MasTec is organized as a Florida corporation and its fiscal year ends
December 31. MasTec or its predecessors have been active in the specialty infrastructure services
industry for over 70 years.
In connection with the filing of its Annual Report on Form 10-K for 2003, the Company restated
its 2002 financial statements as discussed in Note 2. All 2002 amounts in the financial statements
reflect these restatements.
The following is a summary of the significant accounting policies followed in the preparation
of the accompanying consolidated financial statements:
Management estimates. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with United
States generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses, and
related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. The more significant estimates relate to
our revenue recognition, allowance for doubtful accounts, intangible assets, accrued insurance,
income taxes, litigation and contingencies. Estimates are based on historical experience and on
various other assumptions that the Company believes to be reasonable under the circumstances, the
results of which form the basis for judgments about results and the carrying values of assets and
liabilities. Actual results and values may differ from these estimates.
Principles of consolidation. The consolidated financial statements include MasTec and its
subsidiaries. The Company entered into a joint venture with a third party at the end of 2003 in
which the Company owns a 51% interest. Other parties interests in consolidated entities are
reported as minority interests. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in
consolidation.
Reclassifications. Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to the 2004
presentation. In addition, as discussed in Note 10, the Company ceased doing business in Brazil
and in Network Services in 2004. Accordingly, the net loss for these entities in 2002 and 2003
have been reclassified to loss from discontinued operations in the Companys consolidated
statements of operations.
Comprehensive loss. Comprehensive loss is a measure of net loss and all other changes in
equity that result from transactions other than with shareholders. Comprehensive loss consists of
net loss and foreign currency translation adjustments.
Revenue recognition. Revenue and related costs for master and other service agreements billed
on a time and materials basis are recognized as the services are rendered. There are also some
service agreements that are billed on a fixed fee basis. Under the Companys fixed fee master
service and similar type service agreements the Company furnishes various specified units of
service for a separate fixed price per unit of service. The Company recognizes revenue as the
related unit of service is performed. For service agreements on a fixed fee basis, profitability
will be reduced if the actual costs to complete each unit exceed original estimates. The Company
also immediately recognizes the full amount of any estimated loss on these fixed fee projects if
estimated costs to complete the remaining units exceed the revenue to be received from such units.
The Company recognizes revenue on unit based construction/installation projects using the
units-of-delivery method. The Companys unit based contracts relate primarily to contracts that
require the installation or construction of specified units within an infrastructure system. Under
the units-of-delivery method revenue is recognized at the contractually agreed price per unit as
the units are completed and delivered. Profitability will be reduced if the actual costs to
complete each unit exceed original estimates. The Company is also required to immediately
recognize the full amount of any estimated loss on these projects if estimated costs to complete
the remaining units for the project exceed the revenue to be received from such units. For certain
clients with unit based construction/installation contracts the Company recognizes revenue after
the service is performed and work orders are approved to ensure that collectibility is
probable from these clients. Revenue from completed work orders not collected in accordance with
the
28
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
payment terms established with these clients is not recognized until collection is assured.
The Companys non-unit based, fixed price installation/construction contracts relate primarily
to contracts that require the construction, design and installation of an entire infrastructure
system. The Company recognizes revenue and related costs as work progresses on non-unit based,
fixed price contracts using the percentage-of-completion method, which relies on contract revenue
and estimates of total expected contract revenue and costs. The Company estimates total project
costs and profit to be earned on each long-term, fixed-price contract prior to commencement of work
on the contract. The Company follows this method since reasonably dependable estimates of the
revenue and costs applicable to various stages of a contract can be made. Under the
percentage-of-completion method, the Company records revenue and recognizes profit or loss as work
on the contract progresses. The cumulative amount of revenue recorded on a contract at a specified
point in time is the percentage of total estimated revenue that incurred costs to date bear to
estimated total contract costs, after adjusting estimated total contract costs for the most recent
information. If, as work progresses, the actual contract costs exceed estimates, the profit
recognized on revenue from that contract decreases. The Company recognizes the full amount of any
estimated loss on a contract at the time the estimates indicate such a loss.
The Companys clients generally supply materials such as cable, conduit and telephone
equipment. Customer furnished materials are not included in revenue and cost of sales as all
materials are purchased by the customer. The customer determines the specification of the
materials that are to be utilized to perform installation/construction services. The Company is
only responsible for the performance of the installation/construction services and not the
materials for any contract that includes customer furnished materials and nor does the Company have
any risk associated with customer furnished materials. The Companys clients retain the financial
and performance risk of all customer furnished materials.
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts are classified as
current liabilities. Any costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings are classified as
current assets. Work in process on contracts is based on work performed but not billed to clients
as per individual contract terms.
Allowance for doubtful accounts. The Company maintains allowances for doubtful accounts for
estimated losses resulting from the inability of its clients to make required payments. Management
analyzes past due balances based on invoice date, historical bad debt experience, client
concentrations, client credit-worthiness, client financial condition and credit reports, the
availability of mechanics and other liens, the existence of payment bonds and other sources of
payment, and current economic trends when evaluating the adequacy of the allowance for doubtful
accounts. The Company reviews the adequacy of the reserves on a quarterly basis. Amounts are
written off against the allowance when deemed uncollectible.
Basic and diluted net loss per share. Basic net loss per common share is computed by dividing
income available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding. Diluted net loss per common share include the dilutive effect of stock options using
the treasury stock method. Potentially dilutive shares for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003
and 2004, of approximately 74,000 shares, 479,000 shares and 593,000 shares, respectively, were not
included in the diluted per share calculation because their effect would be anti-dilutive.
Accordingly, for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, diluted net loss per common
share is the same as basic net loss per common share.
Cash and cash equivalents. All short-term investments with maturities of three months or less
when purchased are considered to be cash equivalents. Restricted cash related to collateral of
the revolving credit facility is also included in cash and cash equivalents.
Inventories. Inventories consist of materials and supplies for construction projects, and are
typically purchased on a project-by-project basis. Inventories are valued using the weighted
average-cost method and are stated at the lower of cost or market. Construction projects are
completed pursuant to customer specifications. The loss of the customer or the cancellation of the
project could result in an impairment of the value of materials purchased for that customer or
project. Technological or market changes can also render certain materials obsolete. Inventory
reserves are determined based upon the specific facts and circumstances for each project and market
conditions. During 2002, 2003 and 2004, the Company recorded a provision for inventory obsolescence
of $5.2 million, $1.8 million and $900,000, respectively, in Costs of revenue in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations.
Property and equipment. Property and equipment are recorded at cost. Depreciation is computed
using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets. Leasehold
improvements are depreciated over the shorter of the term of the lease or the estimated useful
lives of the improvements. Expenditures for repairs and maintenance are charged to expense as
incurred. Expenditures for betterments and major improvements are capitalized and depreciated over
the remaining useful life of the asset. The
29
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
carrying amounts of assets sold or retired and related accumulated depreciation are eliminated
in the year of disposal and the resulting gains and losses are included in other income or expense.
Deferred financing costs. Deferred financing costs related to the Companys revolving credit
facility and the senior subordinated notes whose short and long-term portions are included in other
current and non-current assets in the consolidated balance sheets are amortized over the related
terms of the debt using the effective interest method. Net deferred financing costs were $5.1
million and $4.2 million at December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively.
Software capitalization. The Company capitalizes certain costs incurred in connection with
developing or obtaining internal use software in accordance with American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants Statement of Position 98-1, Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software
Developed or Obtained for Internal Use. These capitalized software costs are included in Property
and equipment, net in the consolidated balance sheets and are being amortized ratably over a
period not to exceed seven years.
Intangibles and other long lived assets. Long-lived assets and goodwill are recorded at the
lower of carrying value or estimated fair value. Intangibles are amortized on a straight line
basis over their definite useful life. Long-lived assets are depreciated using the straight-line
method over the shorter of the useful lives (five to forty years) or lease terms (five to seven
years for leasehold improvements) of the respective assets. Repairs and maintenance on such items
are expensed as incurred.
Management assesses the impairment of intangibles long-lived assets and goodwill at least
annually or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be
recoverable.
The Company follows the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No.
142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (SFAS No. 142). Goodwill acquired in a purchase
business combination and determined to have an infinite useful life is not amortized, but instead
tested for impairment at least annually in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 142. In
addition, acquired intangible assets are required to be recognized and amortized over their useful
lives if the benefit of the asset is based on contractual or legal rights. Effective January 1,
2002, we adopted SFAS No. 142 resulting in a write-down of our goodwill, net of tax, in the amount
of $25.7 million, which is reflected in the consolidated financial statements as a cumulative
effect of a change in accounting principle as discussed in Note 3. Impairment losses subsequent to
adoption are performed during the fourth quarter of each year starting in 2002 and are reflected in
operating income or loss in the consolidated statement of operations. During the fourth quarter of
2002, the Company recorded an additional impairment charge of $79.7 million which is reflected in
operating losses in the consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2002.
No impairment charges were recorded in 2003 and 2004 in connection with the annual review. In
connection with the abandonment of the Brazil subsidiary as discussed in Note 10, the Company wrote
off goodwill associated with this reporting entity in the year ended December 31, 2004 in the
amount of $12.3 million which is included in the loss from discontinued operations.
The Company reviews its long-lived assets, including property and equipment that are held and
used in its operations for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the
carrying amount of the asset may not be recoverable, as required by SFAS No. 144. If such an event
or change in circumstances is present, the Company will estimate the undiscounted future cash
flows, less the future outflows necessary to obtain those inflows, expected to result from the use
of the asset and its eventual disposition. If the sum of the undiscounted future cash flows is less
than the carrying amount of the related assets, the Company will recognize an impairment loss or
review its depreciation policies as may be appropriate. The Company records impairment losses
resulting from such abandonment in operating income. Assets to be disposed of are reclassified as
assets held for sale at the lower of their carrying amount or fair value less costs to sell.
Write-downs to fair value less costs to sell are reported above the operating income line as other
expense. See Note 6 for discussion of impairment losses recognized in 2002, 2003 and 2004.
Accrued insurance. The Company maintains insurance policies subject to per claim deductibles
of $2 million for our workers compensation and general liability policies and $3 million for our
automobile liability policy. The Company has excess umbrella coverage for losses in excess of the
primary coverages up to $100 million per claim and in the aggregate. The liabilities are
actuarially determined on a quarterly basis for unpaid claims and associated expenses, including
the ultimate liability for claims incurred and an estimate of claims incurred but not reported.
The accruals are based upon known facts, historical trends and our reasonable estimate of future
expenses. However, a change in experience or actuarial assumptions could nonetheless materially
affect results of operations in a particular period. Known amounts for claims that are in the
process of being settled, but that have been paid in periods subsequent to those being reported,
are booked in such reporting period.
30
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
On January 1, 2004, MasTec, Inc. formed a captive insurance subsidiary, JMC Insurance Company,
Inc. (JMC), a South Carolina corporation, to write a portion of its workers compensation,
general liability and automobile liability coverages under deductible reinsurance policies. JMC,
which is the Companys first formation and management of a captive insurance company, was
capitalized with a $1 million letter of credit. JMC is a wholly owned subsidiary of MasTec Inc.
and is consolidated in the Companys financial statements.
Income taxes. Income taxes are recorded using the liability method of accounting for deferred
income taxes. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the
expected future tax consequence of temporary differences between the financial statement and income
tax bases of our assets and liabilities. The Company estimates income taxes in each of the
jurisdictions in which the Company operates. This process involves estimating tax exposure together
with assessing temporary differences resulting from differing treatment of items, such as deferred
revenue, for tax and accounting purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and
liabilities, which are included within the consolidated balance sheet. The recording of a net
deferred tax asset assumes the realization of such assets in the future. Otherwise a valuation
allowance must be recorded to reduce this asset to its net realizable value. The Company considers
future taxable income and ongoing prudent and feasible tax planning strategies in assessing the
need for a valuation allowance. In the event that the Company determines that it will not be able
to realize all or part of the net deferred tax asset in the future, an adjustment to the deferred
tax asset would be charged to income in the period such determination is made.
As a result of its 2003 and 2004 operating losses, the Company recorded valuation allowances
aggregating $8.3 million and $32.3 million as of December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively, to
reduce certain of its net deferred Federal, foreign and state tax assets to their estimated net
realizable value. The Company anticipates that it will generate sufficient pretax income in the
future to realize its deferred tax assets. In the event that the Companys future pretax operating
income is insufficient for it to use its deferred tax assets, the Company has based its
determination that the deferred tax assets are still realizable based on a feasible tax planning
strategy that is available to the Company involving the sale of one of its divisions.
Equity investments. The Company has one common stock investment which the Company accounts
for by the equity method because the Company owns between 20% and 50% of the common stock and the
Company has a non-controlling ownership interest. The Companys share of its earnings or losses in
this investment is included in the consolidated statements of operations. As of December 31, 2004
the Companys investment exceeded the net equity of such investment and accordingly the excess is
considered to be equity goodwill. The Company evaluates the equity goodwill for impairment under
Accounting Principle Board No. 18, The Equity Method of Accounting for Investments in Common
Stock, as amended.
In December 2003, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 46R (FIN 46R) which clarified some
of the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities.
(FIN 46) and exempted certain entities from its requirements. FIN 46R was effective on March 31,
2004. The Company has considered the provisions of FIN 46R for this investment and believes it will
not be necessary to include in the consolidated financial statements any assets, liabilities or
activities of this investment. A description of the Companys equity investment and the related
transactions between the Company and this investee is discussed in Note 12.
Stock based compensation. The Company accounts for its stock-based award plans in accordance
with Accounting Principle Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,
and related interpretations, under which compensation expense is recorded to the extent that the
current market price of the underlying stock exceeds the exercise price.
The Company has reflected below the 2002, 2003 and 2004 net loss and the pro forma net loss as
if compensation expense relative to the fair value of the options granted had been recorded under
the provisions of SFAS No. 123 Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. The fair value of each
option grant was estimated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following
assumptions used for grants in 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively: a five, seven and seven year
expected life; volatility factors of 74%, 76% and 80%; risk-free interest rates of 3.0%, 3.0% and
3.6%; and no dividend payments. The required pro forma disclosures are as follows: (in thousands,
except per share data)
31
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Net loss, as reported |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
|
$ |
(52,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(49,437 |
) |
Deduct: Total stock-based employee compensation
expense determined under fair value based methods
for all awards |
|
|
(5,390 |
) |
|
|
(4,092 |
) |
|
|
(8,734 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net loss |
|
$ |
(141,946 |
) |
|
$ |
(56,391 |
) |
|
$ |
(58,171 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.02 |
) |
Pro forma |
|
$ |
(2.96 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.17 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.20 |
) |
The Company also grants restricted stock, which is valued based on the market price of the
common stock on the date of grant. Compensation expense arising from restricted stock grants is
recognized using the straight-line method over the period of the restrictions. Unearned
compensation for performance-based options and restricted stock is shown as a reduction of
stockholders equity in the consolidated balance sheets.
Fair value of financial instruments. The Company estimates the fair market value of financial
instruments through the use of public market prices, quotes from financial institutions and other
available information. Judgment is required in interpreting data to develop estimates of market
value and, accordingly, amounts are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that we could realize
in a current market exchange. Short-term financial instruments, including cash and cash
equivalents, accounts and notes receivable, accounts payable and other liabilities, consist
primarily of instruments without extended maturities, the fair value of which, based on
managements estimates, equaled their carrying values. At December 31, 2003 and 2004, the fair
value of senior subordinated notes was $204.7 million and $184.5 million, respectively, based on
quoted market values. The Company uses letters of credit to back certain insurance policies. The
letters of credit reflect fair value as a condition of their underlying purpose and are subject to
fees competitively determined in the marketplace.
New accounting pronouncements. On December 17, 2003, the staff of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the SEC) published Staff Accounting Bulletin 104, Revenue Recognition, (SAB 104)
to revise or rescind portions of the interpretative guidance included in Topic 13 of the
codification of staff accounting bulletins in order to make this interpretive guidance consistent
with current authoritative accounting and auditing guidance and SEC rules and regulations. The
principal revisions relate to the rescission of material no longer necessary because of private
sector developments in U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The adoption of SAB 104
during December 2003 did not have a material effect on the Companys results of operations or
financial position.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123R which requires the measurement of all employee
share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, using a
fair-value-based method and the recording of such expense in the consolidated statements of
operations. The accounting provisions of SFAS 123R are effective for reporting periods beginning
after June 15, 2005. The Company is required to adopt SFAS 123R in the third quarter of fiscal
2005. The pro forma disclosures previously permitted under SFAS 123 no longer will be an
alternative to financial statement recognition. See Note 1 Stock Based Compensation for the pro
forma net loss and net loss per share amounts, for 2002 through 2004, as if the Company had used a
fair-value-based method similar to the methods required under SFAS 123R to measure compensation
expense for employee stock incentive awards. Although the Company has not yet determined whether
the adoption of SFAS 123R will result in amounts that are similar to the current pro forma
disclosures under SFAS 123, the Company is evaluating the requirements under SFAS 123R and expect
the adoption to have a significant adverse impact on the results of operations.
In March 2004, the FASB issued EITF Issue No. 03-1 (EITF 03-1), The Meaning of
Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments which provided new
guidance for assessing impairment losses on investments. Additionally, EITF 03-1 includes new
disclosure requirements for investments that are deemed to be temporarily impaired. In September
2004, the FASB delayed the accounting provisions of EITF 03-1; however the disclosure requirements
remain effective for annual periods ending after June 15, 2004. The Company will evaluate the
impact of EITF 03-1 once final guidance is issued.
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153, Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets (SFAS 153).
This Statement amends the guidance in APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions
(APB 29). APB 29 provided an exception to the basic measurement principle (fair value) for
exchanges of similar assets, requiring that some nonmonetary exchanges be recorded on a carryover
basis. SFAS 153 eliminates the exception to fair value for exchanges of similar productive assets
and replaces it with a general exception for exchange transactions that do not have commercial
substance, that is, transactions that are not expected to result in significant changes in the cash
flows of the reporting entity. The provisions of SFAS 153 are effective for exchanges of
nonmonetary assets occurring in fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2005. We believe that SFAS
153 will have no significant effect on the financial position, results of operations, and cash
flows of the Company.
32
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
Note 2 Restatement of Financial Statements
2002 Financial Statement Restatement
In connection with the audit of the 2003 financial statements and filing the 2003 Annual
Report on Form 10-K, the Company identified errors in amounts previously reported in its financial
statements for the year ended December 31, 2002. The Company made an error in determining the
ability to realize approximately $4.9 million of its net deferred tax assets at December 31, 2002
relating to certain state income taxes. Understatements were also identified for errors in
computing self-insurance reserves at December 31, 2000, 2001 and 2002 and insurance claims payments
for 2002 made in 2003 that were not accrued as of December 31, 2002. Insurance expense was
increased for the year ended December 31, 2002 in the amount of $4.7 million ($2.9 million, net of
tax). The Company therefore decided that it would be appropriate to restate its financial
information beginning with the year ended December 31, 2000 and including its annual financial
statements for 2001 and 2002.
The following table sets forth the impact of its restatements on certain amounts previously
reported in the Consolidated Financial Statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2002:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
2002 |
|
|
As Reported |
|
As Restated * |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax asset, net |
|
$ |
40,271 |
|
|
$ |
39,206 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
623,792 |
|
|
|
622,681 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
63,492 |
|
|
|
67,399 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
65,696 |
|
|
|
67,412 |
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
130,395 |
|
|
|
136,018 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
22,214 |
|
|
|
26,218 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(54,810 |
) |
|
|
(65,548 |
) |
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
273,748 |
|
|
|
263,010 |
|
Total liabilities and shareholders
equity |
|
$ |
623,792 |
|
|
$ |
622,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
2002 |
|
|
As Reported |
|
As Restated* |
Statement of Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
838,055 |
|
|
$ |
838,055 |
|
Costs of revenue, excluding
Depreciation |
|
|
745,178 |
|
|
|
749,422 |
|
General and administrative expenses. |
|
|
118,278 |
|
|
|
118,750 |
|
Loss before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle and
benefit for income taxes |
|
|
(168,608 |
) |
|
|
(173,324 |
) |
Benefit for income taxes |
|
|
65,473 |
|
|
|
62,439 |
|
Net loss before cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle |
|
|
(103,135 |
) |
|
|
(110,885 |
) |
Net loss |
|
$ |
(128,806 |
) |
|
$ |
(136,556 |
) |
Basic and diluted loss per share |
|
$ |
(2.69 |
) |
|
$ |
(2.85 |
) |
|
|
|
* |
|
Before effect of reclassifying 2002 results of operations of the Brazil and Network Services
Operations to loss from discontinued operation discussed in Note 10. |
Deferred tax asset
During the 2002 financial statement audit, MasTec prepared a tax strategy to support the
carrying value of its deferred tax asset. This tax strategy did not consider the separate
components of state taxes and federal taxes. During the 2003 financial statement audit,
33
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
the Company considered, for the first time, the issue of whether the tax strategy was sufficient to
support a certain portion of the deferred tax asset related to state taxes. Under this revised
analysis considering the impact of state taxes as well as federal taxes, MasTec determined that its
reserves for 2002 and 2003 were understated. Specifically, the Company determined that the
estimated gain from the sale of certain assets and expected revenue apportioned to each state would
be insufficient to offset losses in certain states. MasTec therefore restated its 2002 financial
statements to record a valuation allowance against the deferred tax asset in the amount of $4.9
million.
Self-insurance reserves
MasTec recalculated its self-insurance reserve requirements for the years ended December 31,
2000, 2001 and 2002 based on a revision in the calculation of aggregate deductible limits provided
for under its insurance policies for automobile, workers compensation and general liability
claims. Previously, MasTecs actuarially computed self-insurance reserves for those years were
calculated based on the understanding that the aggregate deductible amounts were effectively fixed
under the policies and would not be adjusted. In April 2004, Reliance Insurance Corp.
(Reliance), which was MasTecs insurer through July 2000 and which was in liquidation, asserted
the position that the policies permitted it to adjust the aggregate deductible amounts upward based
on a payroll audit. Although Reliance had never audited payroll, MasTec reviewed its own payroll
information to determine what adjustments would be required pursuant to the position asserted by
Reliance. Although management continues to dispute the position asserted by Reliance, the
self-insurance reserves were ultimately adjusted in the amount of $2.7 million in 2000, $2.2
million in 2001, and $809,000 in 2002, due to a lack of available contemporaneous documentation
supporting its original understanding of the policy requirements.
MasTec also restated its December 31, 2002 self-insurance reserve to account for payments made
by its third-party administrator in 2002, but not paid by MasTec until 2003. MasTec had not
adjusted its 2002 self-insurance reserve for these payments on the mistaken understanding that the
payments had already been accounted for in the actuarially computed self-insurance reserve. As a
result, MasTec increased its 2002 self-insurance reserve by $4.7 million to accrue payments made by
its third party administrator in 2002, but not paid until 2003.
Note 3 Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
SFAS No. 142 requires companies to stop amortizing goodwill and certain intangible assets with
an indefinite useful life. Instead, SFAS No. 142 requires that goodwill and intangible assets
deemed to have an indefinite useful life be reviewed for impairment upon adoption of SFAS No. 142
and annually thereafter.
The Company continues to amortize identifiable intangible assets that have a definite useful
life. These consist exclusively of non-compete agreements that expire in 2010. Total amortization
expense related to these non-compete agreements was $0.5 million,
$0.6 million and $0.5 million in 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively. The remaining balance of
$1.1 million at December 31, 2004 will be amortized at a rate of $0.2 million per year.
Under SFAS No. 142, goodwill impairment is deemed to exist if the net book value of a
reporting unit exceeds its estimated fair value as determined using a discounted cash flow
methodology applied to the particular unit. This methodology differs from the Companys previous
policy, in accordance with accounting standards existing at that time, of using undiscounted cash
flows on an enterprise-wide basis to determine recoverability. Upon adoption of SFAS No. 142 in the
first quarter of 2002, we recorded a one-time, non-cash charge of approximately $25.7 million net
of $13.8 million tax benefit to reduce the carrying value of our goodwill. This charge is reflected
as a cumulative effect of an accounting change in the accompanying consolidated statement of
operations of which $13.1 million has been reclassified to discontinued operations. (See Note 10).
The SFAS No. 142 goodwill impairment recorded in the first quarter is associated with goodwill
resulting from the acquisition of various inside plant infrastructure businesses and is based on
discounting our projected future cash flows for these companies.
During the fourth quarter of 2002, the Company performed an annual review of goodwill for
impairment. The review resulted in a goodwill impairment charge of approximately $79.7 million
($51.9 million, net of tax) and is based, in part, on an overall decline in the market value of our
stock and market values of other companies that serve our industry. Impairment adjustments
recognized after adoption are required to be recognized as operating expenses and have been
presented under Goodwill impairment in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
The primary factors contributing to the impairment charge were the overall
34
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
deterioration of the business climate during 2002, the continued depression in the Companys stock
price, and the expected termination of various operations as a result of our restructuring plan
(see Note 8).
During the fourth quarter of 2003 and 2004, the Company performed its annual review of
goodwill for impairment. No impairment charge for 2003 and 2004 was required as a result of this
review. In connection with the abandonment of the Brazil subsidiary as discussed in Note 10, the
Company wrote off goodwill in the year ended December 31, 2004 in the amount of $12.3 million.
Note 4 Other Assets and Liabilities
Prepaid expenses and other current assets as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 consisted of the
following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Deferred tax assets |
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
6,107 |
|
Notes receivable |
|
|
3,890 |
|
|
|
2,511 |
|
Non-trade receivables |
|
|
7,374 |
|
|
|
22,164 |
|
Other investments and assets held for sale |
|
|
7,712 |
|
|
|
5,884 |
|
Prepaid expenses and deposits |
|
|
7,239 |
|
|
|
5,931 |
|
Other |
|
|
5,378 |
|
|
|
1,231 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
$ |
31,801 |
|
|
$ |
43,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-current assets consist of the following as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Long-term receivables, including retainage |
|
$ |
10,696 |
|
|
$ |
4,694 |
|
Equity investment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,780 |
|
Investment in real estate |
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
Long-term portion of deferred financing costs, net |
|
|
3,639 |
|
|
|
2,414 |
|
Cash surrender value of insurance policies |
|
|
4,691 |
|
|
|
5,279 |
|
Non-compete agreement, net |
|
|
1,572 |
|
|
|
1,080 |
|
Insurance escrow |
|
|
7,219 |
|
|
|
7,083 |
|
Other |
|
|
9,989 |
|
|
|
7,072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
39,489 |
|
|
$ |
33,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other current and non-current liabilities consist of the following as of December 31, 2003 and
2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued compensation |
|
$ |
21,459 |
|
|
$ |
15,090 |
|
Accrued insurance |
|
|
13,127 |
|
|
|
16,691 |
|
Accrued interest |
|
|
6,458 |
|
|
|
6,329 |
|
Accrued restructuring |
|
|
600 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
Accrued losses on contracts |
|
|
7,482 |
|
|
|
2,638 |
|
Accrued guaranteed equity investment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
Accrued labor claims |
|
|
10,336 |
|
|
|
|
|
Due to subcontractors |
|
|
5,611 |
|
|
|
8,948 |
|
Other |
|
|
13,035 |
|
|
|
12,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
78,108 |
|
|
$ |
64,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Non-current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued insurance |
|
$ |
24,524 |
|
|
$ |
33,751 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
333 |
|
Other |
|
|
7,016 |
|
|
|
4,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
31,974 |
|
|
$ |
38,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 5 Accounts Receivable
35
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
Accounts receivable, classified as current, consist of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Contract billings |
|
$ |
188,593 |
|
|
$ |
183,873 |
|
Retainage |
|
|
15,252 |
|
|
|
13,533 |
|
Unbilled revenue |
|
|
33,210 |
|
|
|
23,297 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
237,055 |
|
|
|
220,703 |
|
Less allowance for doubtful accounts |
|
|
28,844 |
|
|
|
19,960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
$ |
208,211 |
|
|
$ |
200,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retainage, which has been billed but is not due until completion of performance and acceptance
by clients, is expected to be collected within one year. Any retainage expected to be collected
beyond a year is recorded in long-term other assets.
Activity for the allowance for doubtful accounts is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Allowance for doubtful accounts at beginning of year |
|
$ |
25,843 |
|
|
$ |
28,844 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts from continued operations |
|
|
4,278 |
|
|
|
5,086 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts from discontinued operations |
|
|
4,517 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts charged against the allowance |
|
|
(5,794 |
) |
|
|
(13,970 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts at end of year |
|
$ |
28,844 |
|
|
$ |
19,960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 6 Property and Equipment
Property and equipment including property and equipment under capital leases, is comprised of
the following as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Useful Lives |
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
(In Years) |
Land |
|
$ |
5,235 |
|
|
$ |
5,235 |
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings and leasehold improvements |
|
|
9,642 |
|
|
|
9,736 |
|
|
|
5 - 40 |
|
Machinery and equipment |
|
|
212,613 |
|
|
|
176,531 |
|
|
|
2 - 15 |
|
Office furniture and equipment |
|
|
38,415 |
|
|
|
33,224 |
|
|
|
3 - 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
265,905 |
|
|
|
224,726 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(180,073 |
) |
|
|
(155,423 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
85,832 |
|
|
$ |
69,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment under capitalized leasing arrangements are depreciated over their
estimated useful lives.
Management reviews long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be realizable. If an evaluation is
required, the estimated future undiscounted cash flows associated with the asset are compared to
the assets carrying amount to determine if an impairment of such asset is necessary. The effect of
any impairment would be to expense the difference between the fair value of such asset and its
carrying value.
A review of the carrying value of property and equipment was conducted during the fourth
quarter of 2002 in accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of
Long-Lived Assets. This review was conducted in connection with the Companys plan of exiting
businesses that did not have adequate revenue or margins to support the desired level of
profitability and consideration of changes in the business environment which caused change in the
extent and manner in which these assets were being used. Depreciation expense was reduced by $5.8
million and $5.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively, from the
amount of expense which would had been reported using the previous useful lives as a result of the
change in estimate.
36
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
An impairment loss for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 of $12.8 million, $0.9
million and $2.0 million, respectively, has been recognized and is presented in other (expense)
income in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations, for property and equipment whose
carrying value was not recoverable (carrying value exceeded undiscounted cash flows expected to
result from the use and eventual disposition of the assets) and exceeded its fair market value. In
2002, fair market value was determined by independent valuations. In 2003 and 2004, fair market
value was based on disposals of similar assets.
Note 7 Debt
Debt is comprised of the following at December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Revolving credit facility at LIBOR plus 3.25% (5.25%) and
the banks prime rate plus 1.75% (7%) for 2003 and 2004,
respectively |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
7.75% senior subordinated notes due February 2008 |
|
|
195,887 |
|
|
|
195,915 |
|
Notes payable for equipment, at interest rates from 7.5% to
8.5% due in installments through the year 2008 |
|
|
1,418 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
Other revolving debt |
|
|
4,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt |
|
|
201,665 |
|
|
|
196,158 |
|
Less current maturities |
|
|
(4,709 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
$ |
196,956 |
|
|
$ |
196,059 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revolving Credit Facility
The Company has a revolving credit facility for North American operations that provides for
borrowings up to an aggregate of $125.0 million. The amount that the Company can borrow at any
given time is based upon a formula that takes into account, among other things, eligible billed and
unbilled accounts receivable, which can result in borrowing availability of less than the full
amount of the facility. As of December 31, 2003 and 2004, net availability under the credit
facility totaled $37.9 million and $25.5 million net of outstanding standby letters of credit
aggregating $54.5 million and $66.8 million, respectively. At December 31, 2004, $63.3 million of
the outstanding letters of credit are issued to support the Companys casualty insurance
requirements or surety needs. These letters of credit mature at various dates through December 31,
2005, and except for Letters of Credit totaling $10.0 million, most have automatic renewal
provisions subject to prior notice of cancellation. The Company had no outstanding draws under the
credit facility at December 31, 2004 and 2003. The revolving credit facility matures on January 22,
2007. The revolving credit facility is collateralized by a first priority security interest in
substantially all of the Companys North American assets, including $5.0 million in restricted cash
which is included in cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2004 and a pledge of the stock of
certain of the operating subsidiaries. All wholly owned subsidiaries collateralize the facility.
Interest under the facility accrues at rates based, at the Companys option, on the agent banks
base rate plus a margin of between 0.75% and 1.75% or its LIBOR rate (as defined in the credit
facility) plus a margin of between 2.25% and 3.25%, each margin depending on certain financial
thresholds. The facility includes an unused facility fee of 0.50%, which may be adjusted to as low
as 0.375% or as high as 0.625% depending on the amount of the total commitment which is unused.
The revolving credit facility contains customary events of default (including cross-default)
provisions and covenants related to the North American operations that prohibit, among other
things, making investments and acquisitions in excess of a specified amount, incurring additional
indebtedness in excess of a specified amount, paying cash dividends, making other distributions in
excess of a specified amount, making capital expenditures in excess of a specified amount, creating
liens against the Companys assets, prepaying other indebtedness including the Companys 7.75%
senior subordinated notes, and engaging in certain mergers or combinations without the prior
written consent of the lenders. In addition, any deterioration in the quality of billed and
unbilled receivables would reduce availability under the credit facility.
The Company is required to be in compliance with certain financial covenants measured on a
monthly basis. As a result of the Companys net loss for the year ended December 31, 2004, the
Company was not in compliance with a monthly financial covenant, at fixed charge coverage ratio, of
the credit facility at December 31, 2004. The credit facility was amended on March 17, 2005
modifying this covenant and other financial covenants and the Company was in compliance with its
amended credit facilitys financial
37
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
covenants at December 31, 2004. Under the amended agreement, the Companys North American
operations must maintain minimum tangible net worth equal to:
|
|
|
$45 million at December 31, 2004; |
|
|
|
|
$40 million from January 31 through May 31, 2005; |
|
|
|
|
$45 million from June 30 through August 31, 2005; |
|
|
|
|
$53.5 million from September 30 through November 30, 2005; then |
|
|
|
|
53.5 million beginning December 1, 2005; plus 50% of the consolidated net income of our
operations from December 1, 2005 through the date of determination. |
Since April 1, 2004, the Companys North American Operations was also required to maintain a
minimum fixed charge coverage ratio, computed on a monthly basis, beginning in May 2004. The fixed
charge coverage ratio is generally defined to mean the ratio of
our net income before interest expense, income tax expense, depreciation expense, and
amortization expense plus $1.1 million to consolidated interest expense and current maturities of
debt for the period of determination. For the purposes of determining the current maturities of
long term debt during the period from April 2004 through March 2005 used in determining the fixed
charge coverage ratio the amount of current maturities of long term debt as of any month during
this period is multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of cumulative months
since April 2004, and the denominator of which is 12.
|
|
|
|
|
Period |
|
Ratio |
For the 9 month period ending December 31, 2004 |
|
|
1.50 to 1.00 |
|
For each of
the 10 and 11 month periods ending January 31 and February 28, 2005 |
|
|
1.15 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending March 31, April 30 and May 31, 2005 |
|
|
1.20 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending June 30, July 31, and August 31, 2005 |
|
|
1.25 to 1.00 |
|
For each of the 12 month periods ending on September 30, October 31, and
November 30, 2005 |
|
|
1.50 to 1.00 |
|
For the 12 month period ending on December 31, 2005 and each 12 month period
ending on the last day of each calendar month thereafter |
|
|
2.00 to 1.00 |
|
Based upon the Companys projections for 2005, the Company believes they will be in
compliance with the amended credit facilitys financial covenants for 2005. The Company is
dependent upon borrowings and letters of credit under this credit facility to fund operations.
Should the Company be unable to comply with the terms and covenants of the amended credit facility,
it would be required to obtain further modifications of the credit facility or another source of
financing to continue to operate. The Company may not be able to achieve its 2005 projections and
thus may not be in compliance with the amended credit facilitys financial covenants in 2005.
The Companys variable rate credit facility exposes it to interest rate risk. However, the
Company had no borrowings outstanding under the credit facility at December 31, 2004.
Senior Subordinated Notes
The Company has a $196.0 million, 7.75% senior subordinated notes due in February 2008, with
interest due semi-annually, of which $195.9 million, net of discount, is outstanding as of December
31, 2004. The notes are redeemable, at the companys option at 102.583% of the principal amount
during the twelve-month period beginning February 1, 2004, 101.292% during the twelve-month period
beginning February 1, 2005, and 100% annually thereafter. The notes also contain default (including
cross-default) provisions and covenants restricting many of the same transactions as under our
credit facility.
The Company had no holdings of derivative financial or commodity instruments at December 31,
2004.
The maturities of long-term debt obligations (excluding capital leases) as of December 31,
2004, are as follows (in thousands):
38
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
$ |
99 |
|
2006 |
|
|
76 |
|
2007 |
|
|
56 |
|
2008 |
|
|
195,925 |
|
2009 and thereafter |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
196,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 8 Restructuring Charges
During the second quarter of 2002, the Company initiated a study to determine the proper
balance of downsizing and cost cutting in relation to its ability to respond to current and future
work opportunities in each of its service offerings. The review not only evaluated the Companys
current operations, but also the growth and opportunity potential of each service offering as well
as the
consolidation of back-office processes. As a result of this review, the Company implemented a
restructuring program which included the:
|
|
|
elimination of service offerings that no longer fit into the core business strategy.
This process included reducing or eliminating service offerings that did not fit our
long-term business plan. |
|
|
|
|
reduction or elimination of services that did not produce adequate revenue or margins
to support the level of profitability, return on investment or investments in capital
resources. This included exiting contracts that did not meet minimum rate of return
requirements to improve margins and reduce costs. |
|
|
|
|
analysis of businesses that provided adequate profit contributions but needed margin improvements. |
|
|
|
|
review of new business opportunities in similar business lines. |
The elements of the restructuring program included involuntary terminations of employees in
affected service offerings and the consolidation of facilities. The plan resulted in a pre-tax
charge to operations of $3.7 million in 2002. The involuntary terminations impacted both the
salaried and hourly employee groups. The total employees impacted were approximately 1,025. As of
December 31, 2004, all employees have been terminated and virtually all severance and benefit costs
have been paid. Approximately 25 facilities were closed during 2002 as part of the program in which
some of the assets were sold, while other assets were retained and transferred to other locations.
These facility closures were not accounted for as discontinued operations due to these facilities
not representing separate components of the Companys business for which cash flows could be
clearly defined. The Company also continues to be involved in the markets in which these 25
facilities operated. As of December 31, 2004, remaining obligations under existing lease agreements
for closed facilities amounted to approximately $0.2 million.
In addition to the costs noted above, the Company paid a consulting firm approximately $4.6
million to assist in preparing the plan, all of which was expensed in 2002 as the plan was complete
as of December 31, 2002. Valuation allowances and impairment losses related to property and
equipment totaling $12.8 million were recorded in connection with the restructuring plan (see Note
6).
The following is a reconciliation of the restructuring accruals as of December 31, 2004 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued Costs at December 31, 2003 |
|
$ |
600 |
|
Cash payments |
|
|
(388 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued costs at December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
212 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 9 Lease Commitments
The Company has operating lease agreements for premises and equipment that expire on various
dates. The operating lease agreements are subject to escalation. Rent expense for the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 was approximately $18.5 million, $21.2 million and $18.7 million,
respectively.
39
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
The Company also has capital lease agreements for equipment that expire on various dates.
Minimum future lease commitments under non-cancelable operating leases and future minimum
capital lease payments, including effect of escalation clauses in effect at December 31, 2004 were
as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating |
|
Capital |
|
|
Leases |
|
Leases |
2005 |
|
$ |
28,707 |
|
|
$ |
497 |
|
2006 |
|
|
21,420 |
|
|
|
429 |
|
2007 |
|
|
13,180 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
2008 |
|
|
4,813 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
2009 |
|
|
2,426 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
3,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments |
|
$ |
74,079 |
|
|
$ |
1,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less amounts representing interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
251 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,583 |
|
Less current portion |
|
|
|
|
|
|
497 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For leases with purchase options, the option to purchase equipment is at estimated fair market
value. We have non-cancelable subleases for certain capital leases which are recorded in other
assets. Future minimum leases received from subleases through January 2010 aggregated $3.9 million
as of December 31, 2004.
Note
10 Discontinued Operations
In March 2004, the Company ceased performing contractual services for customers in Brazil,
abandoned all assets in its Brazil subsidiary and made a determination to exit the Brazil market.
During the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company wrote off approximately $12.3 million in
goodwill (see Note 3) and the net investment in the Brazil subsidiary of approximately $6.8 million
which consisted of the accumulated foreign currency translation loss of $21.3 million less a net
deficit in assets of $14.5 million. The abandoned Brazil subsidiary has been classified as a
discontinued operation. The results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2003
have been reclassified to loss from discontinued operations. The net income for the Brazil
subsidiary was $1.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2002 and the net loss for Brazil was
$21.8 million and $20.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively. In
November 2004, the subsidiary applied for relief and was adjudicated bankrupt by a Brazilian
bankruptcy court. The subsidiary is currently being liquidated under court supervision.
The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities of our Brazil operations as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Current assets |
|
$ |
7,755 |
|
|
$ |
290 |
|
Non current assets |
|
|
2,244 |
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities |
|
|
(21,886 |
) |
|
|
(19,455 |
) |
Non current liabilities |
|
|
(1,334 |
) |
|
|
(2,170 |
) |
Accumulated foreign currency translation. |
|
|
(21,091 |
) |
|
|
(21,335 |
) |
The following table summarizes the results of operations for our Brazil operations (in
thousands):
40
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Revenue |
|
$ |
41,773 |
|
|
$ |
18,761 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Cost of revenue |
|
|
(37,110 |
) |
|
|
(20,846 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Operating expenses |
|
|
(3,393 |
) |
|
|
(18,877 |
) |
|
|
(1,046 |
) |
Income (loss) from operations
before (provision) benefit for
income taxes and minority interest |
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
(20,962 |
) |
|
|
(1,051 |
) |
(Provision) Benefit for income taxes |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
(2,584 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
(1,708 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,191 |
|
|
$ |
(21,838 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,051 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the fourth quarter 2004, we ceased performing services and committed to sell our
Network Services division and exit this service market. This division has been classified as a
discontinued operation. The results of operations for the years ended December
31, 2002 and 2003 have been reclassified to loss from discontinued operations. The net loss
for the Network Services division was $17.9 million, $6.0 million and $3.0 million for the years
ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively.
The following table summarizes the assets and liabilities of our Network Services as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Current assets |
|
$ |
4,063 |
|
|
$ |
4,464 |
|
Non current assets |
|
|
1,106 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Current liabilities |
|
|
5,278 |
|
|
|
2,753 |
|
Non current liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders deficit |
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
1,738 |
|
The following table summarizes the results of operations for our Network Services operations
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Revenue |
|
$ |
29,815 |
|
|
$ |
24,006 |
|
|
$ |
17,046 |
|
Cost of revenue |
|
|
(28,457 |
) |
|
|
(27,728 |
) |
|
|
(16,435 |
) |
Operating and other expenses |
|
|
(9,232 |
) |
|
|
(5,821 |
) |
|
|
(3,614 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations before benefit
for income taxes and cumulative
effect of accounting change |
|
$ |
(7,874 |
) |
|
$ |
(9,543 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,003 |
) |
Cumulative effect of accounting change |
|
|
(13,075 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit for income taxes |
|
|
3,036 |
|
|
|
3,522 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(17,913 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,021 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,003 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 11 Retirement and Stock Option Plans
We have a 401(k) plan covering all eligible employees. Subject to certain dollar limits,
eligible employees may contribute up to 15% of their pre-tax annual compensation to the plan. Our
matching contributions in the form of Company Common Stock charged to earnings were approximately
$806,000 for the year ended December 31, 2002. We did not match employee contributions in 2003 and
2004 but may, at the Board of Directors discretion, do so in the future.
The Company has granted options to purchase its common stock to employees and directors of the
Company and its affiliates under various stock option plans at no less than the fair market value
of the underlying stock on the date of grant. These options are
41
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
granted for a term not exceeding ten years and are forfeited in the event the employee or
director terminates his or her employment or relationship with the Company or one of its
affiliates. All option plans contain anti-dilutive provisions that require the adjustment of the
number of shares of the Company common stock represented by each option for any stock splits or
dividends.
We have seven stock option plans in effect as of December 31, 2004: the 1994 Stock Incentive
Plan (the 1994 Plan), the 1994 Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors (the Directors
Plan), the 1997 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan (the 1997 Incentive Plan), the 1997
Non-Qualified Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the 1997 Plan), the Non-Employee Directors Stock
Plan, the 1999 Non-Qualified Option Plan (the Non-Qualified Plan), the 2003 Employee Stock
Incentive Plan (the 2003 Plan) and the Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for
Non-Employees (the 2003 Non-Employee Plan) and individual option agreements. Typically, options
under these plans are granted at fair market value at the date of grant, vest between three to five
years after grant and terminate no later than 10 years from the date of grant.
The 2003 Non-Employee Plan was adopted in April 2003 and authorized granting of restricted
stock to non-employees. The Company has reserved 1,000,000 shares of common stock for grant under
the 2003 Non-Employee Plan which covers stock options or restricted stock awards. The Company
grants restricted stock which is valued based on the market price of the common stock on the date
of grant. Compensation expense arising from restricted stock grants is recognized using the
straight-line method over the period of the restrictions. Unearned compensation for the restricted
stock is shown as a reduction of stockholders equity in the consolidated balance sheets. The
Company approved the issuance of restricted stock to the board of directors in 2005 with grant
dates in 2004. Therefore, the Company recorded a non-cash stock compensation expense and a
liability in the year ended December 31, 2004 in the amount of approximately $39,000 based on the
market price at the date of grant.
Under these plans there were a total of 815,855, 7,590,793 and 7,453,209 options available for
grant at December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively. The 1994 Plan and the Directors Plan
expired in 2004. In addition, there are 241,450 options outstanding under individual option
agreements with varying vesting schedules at exercise prices ranging from $2.56 to $17.67 with
terms up to 10 years. The 1997 Plan also allows eligible employees to purchase common stock of the
company through payroll deductions or in a lump sum at a 15% discount from fair market value. The
amount of compensation expense related to these transactions is immaterial.
The following is a summary of all stock option transactions during the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock |
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
Options |
|
Exercise Price |
Outstanding December 31, 2001 |
|
|
6,725,387 |
|
|
$ |
17.18 |
|
Granted |
|
|
933,500 |
|
|
|
5.41 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canceled |
|
|
(622,275 |
) |
|
|
22.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding December 31, 2002 |
|
|
7,036,612 |
|
|
$ |
15.32 |
|
Granted |
|
|
2,812,000 |
|
|
|
7.28 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(171,176 |
) |
|
|
4.67 |
|
Canceled |
|
|
(393,556 |
) |
|
|
19.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding December 31, 2003 |
|
|
9,283,880 |
|
|
$ |
12.91 |
|
Granted |
|
|
610,500 |
|
|
|
9.01 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(343,839 |
) |
|
|
5.38 |
|
Canceled |
|
|
(588,511 |
) |
|
|
13.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding December 31, 2004 |
|
|
8,962,030 |
|
|
$ |
12.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables summarize information about stock options outstanding:
42
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2004 |
|
|
Stock Options Outstanding |
|
Options Exercisable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Stock |
|
Remaining |
|
Weighted Average |
|
Number of |
|
Weighted Average |
Range of Exercise Prices |
|
Options |
|
Contractual Life |
|
Exercise Price |
|
Stock Options |
|
Exercise Price |
$2.0050 - $2.2150 |
|
|
376,499 |
|
|
|
5.29 |
|
|
$ |
2.0552 |
|
|
|
92,840 |
|
|
$ |
2.0550 |
|
$2.2151 - $3.3400 |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
4.62 |
|
|
$ |
3.3400 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.3400 |
|
$3.3401 - $4.8600 |
|
|
436,667 |
|
|
|
3.09 |
|
|
$ |
4.4409 |
|
|
|
386,435 |
|
|
$ |
4.3938 |
|
$4.8601 - $7.0900 |
|
|
764,106 |
|
|
|
6.55 |
|
|
$ |
5.5908 |
|
|
|
377,065 |
|
|
$ |
5.7896 |
|
$7.0901 - $10.5600 |
|
|
2,179,816 |
|
|
|
7.06 |
|
|
$ |
8.2993 |
|
|
|
981,101 |
|
|
$ |
8.9504 |
|
$10.5601 - $15.5833 |
|
|
2,587,860 |
|
|
|
3.95 |
|
|
$ |
13.3136 |
|
|
|
2,211,260 |
|
|
$ |
13.1260 |
|
$15.5834 - $21.0417 |
|
|
1,703,901 |
|
|
|
4.53 |
|
|
$ |
19.3286 |
|
|
|
1,703,901 |
|
|
$ |
19.3286 |
|
$21.0418 - $28.5000 |
|
|
525,921 |
|
|
|
2.39 |
|
|
$ |
26.8849 |
|
|
|
517,654 |
|
|
$ |
26.8864 |
|
$28.5001 - $36.8750 |
|
|
232,010 |
|
|
|
1.48 |
|
|
$ |
33.3335 |
|
|
|
232,010 |
|
|
$ |
33.3335 |
|
$36.8751 - $45.0833 |
|
|
5,250 |
|
|
|
2.38 |
|
|
$ |
44.0120 |
|
|
|
5,250 |
|
|
$ |
44.0120 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$2.0050 - $45.0833 |
|
|
8,962,030 |
|
|
|
4.91 |
|
|
$ |
12.8396 |
|
|
|
6,607,516 |
|
|
$ |
14.6839 |
|
As of December 31, 2004, we had 6,607,516 options which were exercisable at a weighted
average exercise price of $14.68 per share. As of December 31, 2003, we had 5,899,561 options which
were exercisable at a weighted average exercise price of $15.78 per share.
Note 12 Equity Investment
In September 2004, MasTec purchased a 49% interest in a limited liability corporation with an
established marketing group. The Companys payments for its interest are due quarterly over three
years beginning in September 2004. Equity payments fluctuate based on the ventures sales. In
addition, the Company is responsible for 49% of the ventures net operating capital needs until the
venture is self sufficient. The Company expects this venture will be able to fully fund its own
operating capital requirements by mid- to late 2005. The venture is intended to strengthen
relationships with existing and future customers, and increase Company sales. The initial
investment of $3.7 million will be paid over four quarters which commenced in the third quarter of
2004 with additional contingent payments of up to $1.3 million per quarter based upon the level of
unit sales and profitability of the limited liability company for the two years following the
period after the initial investment is fully funded.
As of December 31, 2004, the Companys investment exceeded the net equity of such investment
and accordingly the excess is considered to be equity goodwill.
The Company has accounted for this investment using the equity method as the Company has the
ability to exercise significant influence over the operational policies of the Company. As of
December 31, 2004, the Company had an investment balance of approximately $3.7 million in relation
to this investment with a corresponding liability related to the outstanding commitment which is
included in other assets and other liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.
Based upon the lack of significance to the financial information of the Company, no summary
financial information for this equity investment has been provided.
Note 13 Income Taxes
The benefit for income taxes before cumulative change in accounting principle consists of the
following (in thousands):
43
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Current: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
$ |
(2,497 |
) |
|
$ |
315 |
|
|
$ |
2,312 |
|
Foreign |
|
|
557 |
|
|
|
(2,237 |
) |
|
|
(1,015 |
) |
State and local |
|
|
(2,680 |
) |
|
|
4,858 |
|
|
|
251 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,620 |
) |
|
|
2,936 |
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
|
(51,258 |
) |
|
|
(8,888 |
) |
|
|
(2,267 |
) |
Foreign |
|
|
(444 |
) |
|
|
(562 |
) |
|
|
1,015 |
|
State and local, net of valuation provisions |
|
|
(3,023 |
) |
|
|
(1,789 |
) |
|
|
(296 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(54,725 |
) |
|
|
(11,239 |
) |
|
|
(1,548 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit for income taxes |
|
$ |
(59,345 |
) |
|
$ |
(8,303 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The tax effects of significant items comprising our net deferred tax asset as of December 31,
2003 and 2004 are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
Deferred tax assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-compete |
|
$ |
4,188 |
|
|
$ |
3,709 |
|
Bad debts |
|
|
8,839 |
|
|
|
8,080 |
|
Accrued self insurance |
|
|
8,559 |
|
|
|
19,143 |
|
Operating loss and tax credit carry forward |
|
|
61,532 |
|
|
|
73,390 |
|
Other |
|
|
3,117 |
|
|
|
4,853 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
6,500 |
|
|
|
3,972 |
|
Valuation Allowance |
|
|
(8,289 |
) |
|
|
(32,349 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
84,446 |
|
|
|
80,798 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable retainage |
|
|
9,365 |
|
|
|
6,642 |
|
Property and equipment |
|
|
12,225 |
|
|
|
10,301 |
|
Basis differences in acquired assets |
|
|
418 |
|
|
|
409 |
|
Other |
|
|
7,147 |
|
|
|
6,607 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities |
|
|
29,155 |
|
|
|
23,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax asset |
|
$ |
55,291 |
|
|
$ |
56,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2004, the Company has approximately $159.7 million of net operating loss
carryforwards for U.S. federal income tax purposes that expire beginning in 2022. The Company has
net operating loss carryforwards for U.S. state and local purposes that expire from 2005 to 2024.
Additionally, the Company has approximately $4.9 million of net operating loss carryforwards for
Canadian income tax purposes that expire beginning in 2010.
In assessing the ability to realize the deferred tax assets, management considers whether it
is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.
The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable
income during the periods in which these temporary differences become deductible. Management
considers the projected future taxable income and prudent and feasible tax planning strategies in
making this assessment. As of December 31, 2003 and 2004, valuation allowances of $8.3 million and
$32.3 million have been recorded.
A reconciliation of U.S. statutory federal income tax expense on the loss before cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle and benefit for income taxes is as follows:
44
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
U.S. statutory federal rate applied to pretax loss |
|
|
(35 |
)% |
|
|
(35 |
)% |
|
|
(35 |
)% |
State and local income taxes |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Amortization and impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-deductible expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Effect of non U.S operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Worthless stock deduction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(52 |
) |
Other |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit for income taxes |
|
|
(35 |
)% |
|
|
(25 |
)% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 14 Operations by Geographic Areas and Segments
The Company operates in one reportable segment as a specialty trade contractor. The Company
provides services in the telecommunications, broadband (including cable, satellite and high speed
internet), energy, traffic control and homeland security systems markets.
Revenue by customer industry group reflecting the revenue reclassification to discontinued
operations is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Telecommunications |
|
$ |
329,855 |
|
|
$ |
231,263 |
|
|
$ |
251,083 |
|
Broadband |
|
|
152,104 |
|
|
|
265,383 |
|
|
|
342,553 |
|
Energy |
|
|
162,822 |
|
|
|
198,583 |
|
|
|
175,314 |
|
Government |
|
|
121,688 |
|
|
|
132,251 |
|
|
|
144,845 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,469 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, we operated in the United States and
Canada. In 2003, we became engaged in a single project in Mexico which we completed shortly after
December 31, 2003. In 2002 and 2003, we had operations in Brazil. In 2004, we ceased performing
contractual services in Brazil, abandoned all assets in our Brazil subsidiary and made a
determination to exit the Brazil market. The following table reflects financial information for
our U.S. and foreign operations including the reclassification of 2002 and 2003 results of
operations for the Brazil operations and our Network Services division to discontinued operations.
Over the past three years, we have continued to reduce capital expenditures of long-lived assets
and have placed greater reliance on operating leases to meet our equipment needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
|
|
2002 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Revenue: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
$ |
740,224 |
|
|
$ |
800,974 |
|
|
$ |
900,842 |
|
Foreign |
|
|
26,243 |
|
|
|
26,506 |
|
|
|
12,953 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
766,467 |
|
|
$ |
827,480 |
|
|
$ |
913,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
|
2002 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
Long Lived Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
$ |
114,053 |
|
|
$ |
82,541 |
|
|
$ |
68,426 |
|
Foreign |
|
|
4,422 |
|
|
|
3,291 |
|
|
|
877 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
118,475 |
|
|
$ |
85,832 |
|
|
$ |
69,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 15 Commitments and Contingencies
45
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
In the second quarter of 2004, purported class action complaints were filed against the
Company and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of Florida and one was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York. These cases have been consolidated by court order in the Southern District of Florida. The
complaints allege certain violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, related to current and prior period earnings reports. On January 25, 2005, a
motion for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint was filed by Plaintiffs which the Court
granted. Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint on February 22, 2005. Plaintiffs contend
that the Companys financial statements during the purported Class Period of August 12, 2003 to May
11, 2004 were materially misleading in the following areas: 1) the financials for the third
quarter of 2003 were allegedly overstated by $5.8 million in revenue from unapproved change orders
from a variety of Company projects; and 2) the financials for the second quarter of 2003 were
overstated by some $1.3 million as a result of the intentional overstatement of revenue,
inventories and work in progress at the Companys Canadian subsidiary. Plaintiffs seek damages,
not quantified, for the difference between the stock price Plaintiffs paid and the stock price
Plaintiffs believe they should have paid, plus interest and attorney fees. MasTec believes the
claims are without merit. MasTec will vigorously defend these lawsuits but may be unable to
successfully resolve these disputes without incurring significant expenses. Due to the early stage
of these proceedings, any potential loss cannot presently be determined with respect to this
litigation.
On July 28, 2004, MasTec, Inc.s Board of Directors received a demand from a shareholder that
the Board take appropriate steps to remedy breaches of fiduciary duty, mismanagement and corporate
waste, all arising from the same factual predicate set out in the shareholder class actions
described above. On November 18, 2004, the Board of Directors authorized its Executive Committee
to establish appropriate procedures and form a special litigation committee, as contemplated by
Florida law, to investigate these allegations and to determine whether it is in the best interests
of MasTec to pursue an action or actions based on said allegations. On December 22, 2004, a
derivative action was filed by the shareholder. On January 10, 2005, the Executive Committee formed
a special litigation committee to investigate this matter. By agreement of counsel, the derivative
action has been stated during the pendency of
any motion to dismiss in the securities class action.
The Company contracted to construct a natural gas pipeline for Coos County, Oregon in 2003.
Construction work on the pipeline ceased in December 2003 after the County refused payment due on
regular contract invoices of $6.3 million and refused to process change orders for additional work
submitted to the County on or after November 29, 2003. In February 2004, MasTec brought an action
for breach of contract against Coos County in Federal District Court in Oregon, seeking payment for
work done, interest and anticipated profits. In April 2004, Coos County announced it was
terminating the contract and seeking another company to complete the project. Coos County
subsequently counterclaimed for breach of contract and other causes in the Federal District Court
action. The amount of revenue recognized on the Coos County project that remained uncollected at
December 31, 2004 amounted to $6.3 million representing amounts due MasTec on normal progress
payment invoices submitted under the contract. In addition to these uncollected receivables, the
Company also has additional claims for payment and interest in excess of $6.0 million, including
all of its change order billings and retainage, which the Company has not recognized as revenue but
to which the Company believes is due to the Company under the terms of the contract. In addition,
the Company was made party to a number of citizen initiated actions arising from the Coos County
project. A complaint alleging failure to comply with prevailing wage requirements was issued by
the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry. A number of individual property owners brought claims in
Oregon state courts against the Company for property damages and related claims; a number of
citizens groups brought an action in federal court for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act.
All but one of the individual property claims has been settled; one is set for trial in 2005. The
Company will vigorously defend these actions, but may incur significant expense in connection with
that defense.
In connection with the Coos County pipeline project, the United States Army Corps of Engineers
and the Oregon Division of State Land, Department of Environmental Quality issued cease and desist
orders and notices of non-compliance to Coos County and to the Company with respect to the Countys
project. A cease and desist order was issued by the Corps on October 31, 2003 and addressed
sedimentary disturbances and the discharge of bentonite, an inert clay mud employed for this kind
of drilling, resulting from directional boring under stream beds along a portion of the natural gas
pipeline route then under construction. The County and the Company received a subsequent cease and
desist order from the Corps on December 22, 2003. The order addressed additional sedimentary
discharges caused by clean up efforts along the pipeline route. MasTec and the County were in
substantial disagreement with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Division of
State Land as to whether the subject discharges were permitted pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 12
(utility line activities) or were otherwise prohibited pursuant to the Clean Water Act. However,
the Company has been cooperating with Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Division of State Land,
Department of Environmental Quality to mitigate any adverse impact as a result of construction.
Corps of Engineer and Oregon Division of State Land notices or complaints focused for the largest
part on runoff from the construction site and from nearby construction spoil piles
46
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
which may have
increased sediment and turbidity in adjacent waterways and roadside ditches. Runoff was the result
of extremely wet and snowy weather, which produced exceptionally high volumes of runoff water.
MasTec employed two erosion control consulting firms to assist. As weather permitted and sites
became available, MasTec moved spoil piles to disposal sites. Silt fences, sediment entrapping
blankets and sediment barriers were employed in the meantime to prevent sediment runoff.
Ultimately, when spring weather permitted, open areas were filled, rolled and seeded to eliminate
the runoff. To date, mitigation efforts have cost the Company approximately $1.4 million. These
costs were included in the costs on the project at December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2004. No
further mitigation expenses are anticipated. The only additional anticipated liability arises from
possible fines or penalties assessed, or to be assessed by the Corps of Engineers and/or Oregon
Division of State Land. The County accepted a fine of $75,000 to settle this matter with the Corp
of Engineers; the County has not concluded with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. No
fines or penalties have been assessed against the Company by the Corp of Engineers to date. On
August 9, 2004, the Oregon Division of State Land Department of Environmental Quality issued a
Notice of Violation and Assessment of Civil Penalty to MasTec North America in the amount of
$126,000. MasTec North America has denied liability for the civil penalty and requested a formal
contested case hearing on the same.
The potential loss for all Coos Bay matters and settlements reached described above is
estimated to be $205,000 at December 31, 2004, which is recorded in the consolidated balance sheet
as accrued expenses.
The labor union representing the workers of Sistemas e Instalaciones de Telecomunicacion S.A.
(Sintel), a former MasTec subsidiary, initiated an investigative action with a Spanish federal
court that commenced in July 2001 alleging that five former members of the board of directors of
Sintel, including Jorge Mas, the Chairman of the Board of MasTec, and his brother Juan Carlos Mas,
approved a series of allegedly unlawful transactions that led to the bankruptcy of Sintel. The
Company is also named as a potentially liable party. The union alleges Sintel and its creditors
were damaged in the approximate amount of 13 billion pesetas ($95.1 million at December 31, 2004).
The Court has taken no action to enforce a bond order pending since July 2001 for the amount
of alleged damages. The Court has conducted extensive discovery, including the declarations
of certain present and former executives of MasTec, Inc. and intends to conduct additional
discovery. To date, no actions have been taken by the Court against the Company or any of the
named individuals. The Companys directors and officers insurance carrier reimbursed the Company
in the third quarter 2004 for approximately $1.2 million in legal fees already incurred and agreed
to fund legal expenses for the remainder of the litigation. The amount of loss, if any, relating
to this matter cannot presently be determined.
In 2003, the Companys quarterly financial information was restated for $6.1 million of
previously recognized revenue related primarily to work performed on undocumented or unapproved
change orders and other matters disputed by the Companys clients. The revenue restatement was
related to projects performed for ABB Power (ABB),MSE Power Systems (MSE), and the University
of California, and in connection with restated Canadian revenue. Recovery of this revenue and
related revenue from subsequent periods not restated is now the subject of several independent
collection actions. MasTec provided services to ABB, in the amount of $2 million is subject to
dispute. The parties have attempted arbitration, which has been unsuccessful. A legal action was
filed by the Company on February 2005. An action has been brought against MSE in New York state
court. MasTec provided services to MSE on five separate projects in Pennsylvania, New York and
Georgia, with invoices in excess of $8 million now in dispute. The Company experienced cost
overruns in excess of $2.7 million in completing a networking contract for the University of
California as the result of a subcontractors refusal to complete a fixed price contract. An
action has been brought against that subcontractor to recover cost overruns. Finally, the Company
experienced a revenue adjustment resulting from correction of intentionally overstated work in
progress and revenue in an amount of $1.3 million in a Canadian subsidiary. The individuals
responsible for the overstatement were terminated and an action against them has been brought to
recover damages resulting from the overstatement.
In November 2004, the Company entered into, and bonded a conditional $2.6 million settlement
of litigation brought for subcontract work done by Hugh OKane Electric for MasTec on a
telecommunication project for Telergy in New York. Telergy is in bankruptcy and did not pay MasTec
for the Hugh OKane work. The settlement was conditioned on the outcome of an interlocutory appeal
brought by MasTec. The appeal sought to enforce contract terms which relieved MasTec of its
obligation to pay Hugh OKane when MasTec was not paid by Telergy. New Yorks appellate level
court upheld the enforceability of the term of MasTecs contract, but remanded the case to the
trial court to determine whether the Company was estopped from using this contract provision as a
defense. The Company expects to recover the bond posted in connection with the appeal, and will
continue to contest this matter in the trial court. The amount of the loss, if any, relating to
this matter cannot be determined at this time.
The Company is also a party to other pending legal proceedings arising in the normal course of
business. While complete
47
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
assurance cannot be given as to the outcome of any legal claims,
management believes that any financial impact would not be material to the Companys results of
operations, financial position or cash flows.
The Company has commitments at December 31, 2004 to pay life insurance premiums on policies on
the life of its chairman of the board, vice chairman and its chief executive officer totaling $17.7
million over the next nineteen years, for capital leases totaling $1.8 million and, for operating
lease commitments of $74.1 million. In 2004, the Company purchased a 49% interest in a limited
liability company with an established marketing group. The initial investment of $3.7 million will
be paid over four quarters which commenced in the third quarter of 2004 with additional contingent
payments of up to $1.3 million per quarter based upon the level of unit sales and profitability of
the limited liability company for the two years following the period after the initial investment
is fully funded.
The Company is required to provide payment and performance bonds in connection with some of
its contractual commitments. Such bonds amounted to $117.9 million at December 31, 2004 related to
projects in process.
Note 16 Concentrations of Risk
The Company is subject to certain risk factors, including, but not limited to risks related to
economic downturns in the telecommunications and broadband industries, collectibility of
receivables, competition within our industry, the nature of our contracts (which do not obligate
our clients to undertake any infrastructure projects and may be canceled on short notice),
acquisition integration and financing, seasonality, availability of qualified employees,
recoverability of goodwill, and potential exposures to environmental liabilities.
The Company has more than 500 clients throughout the United States, and Canada, which include
some of the largest and most prominent companies in the communications, broadband and energy
fields, as well as government agencies such as departments of transportation. The Companys clients
include incumbent local exchange carriers, broadband and satellite operators, public and private
energy providers, long distance carriers, financial institutions and wireless service providers.
The Company grants credit, generally without collateral, to our customers. Consequently, the
Company is subject to potential credit risk related to changes in business and economic factors.
However, the Company generally has certain lien rights on that work and concentrations of credit
risk are limited due to the diversity of our customer base. The Company believes the billing and
collection policies are adequate to minimize potential credit risk. No customer accounted for more
than 10% of revenue during the year ended December 31, 2002. During 2003, Comcast and
DIRECTV® accounted for 14.2% and 12.0%, respectively. During 2004, DIRECTV®
and Comcast accounted for 21.4% and 12.3%, respectively of total revenue.
The Company maintains allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the
inability of its clients to make required payments. Management analyzes historical bad debt
experience, client concentrations, client credit-worthiness, the availability of mechanics and
other liens, the existence of payment bonds and other sources of payment, and current economic
trends when evaluating the adequacy of the allowance for doubtful accounts. If judgments regarding
the collectability of accounts receivables are incorrect, adjustments to the allowance may be
required, which would reduce profitability. During 2002, 2003 and 2004 bad debt provisions of
$15.4 million, $8.8 million and $5.1 million, respectively, were recorded primarily due to the
general economic climate of 2002. As of December 31, 2004, remaining receivables from clients
undergoing bankruptcy reorganization totaling $15.1 million of which $9.4 million is included in
specific reserves. Based on the analytical process described above, management believes that the
Company will recover the net amounts recorded. The Company maintains an allowance for doubtful
accounts of $28.8 million and $20.0 million as of December 31, 2003 and 2004, respectively for both
specific customers and as a reserve against other past due balances. Should additional clients file
for bankruptcy or experience difficulties, or should anticipated recoveries in existing
bankruptcies and other workout situations fail to materialize, the Company could experience reduced
cash flows and losses in excess of the current allowance.
Note 17 Quarterly Information (Unaudited)
The following table presents unaudited quarterly operating results for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2004. The Company believes that all necessary adjustments have been included
in the amounts stated below to present fairly the quarterly results when read in conjunction with
the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto for the years ended December 31, 2003 and
48
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
2004. The quarterly information has been adjusted for the reclassification of the net loss of
Brazil and Network Services operations to discontinued operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 Quarter Ended |
|
2004 Quarter Ended |
|
|
Mar 31 |
|
Jun 30 |
|
Sep 30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
As |
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restated |
|
Restated |
|
Restated |
|
Dec 31 |
|
Mar 31 |
|
Jun 30 |
|
Sep 30 |
|
Dec 31 |
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
|
(In thousands, except per share data) |
Revenue |
|
$ |
167,839 |
|
|
$ |
194,301 |
|
|
$ |
231,056 |
|
|
$ |
234,284 |
|
|
$ |
194,707 |
|
|
$ |
225,741 |
|
|
$ |
246,622 |
|
|
$ |
246,724 |
|
(Loss) income from
continuing operations |
|
$ |
(1,308 |
) |
|
$ |
2,850 |
|
|
$ |
4,800 |
|
|
$ |
(30,578 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,280 |
) |
|
$ |
(436 |
) |
|
$ |
4,265 |
|
|
$ |
(5,767 |
) |
Loss from discontinued
operations |
|
$ |
(444 |
) |
|
$ |
(830 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,490 |
) |
|
$ |
(24,299 |
) |
|
$ |
(21,786 |
) |
|
$ |
(304 |
) |
|
$ |
(42 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,088 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(1,752 |
) |
|
$ |
2,020 |
|
|
$ |
2,310 |
|
|
$ |
(54,877 |
) |
|
$ |
(46,066 |
) |
|
$ |
(740 |
) |
|
$ |
4,223 |
|
|
$ |
(6,855 |
) |
Basic (loss) income per
share |
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.14 |
) |
Diluted (loss) income
per share |
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.14 |
) |
Basic income (loss) per
share |
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.14 |
) |
Diluted income (loss)
per share |
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
(1.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.95 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.02 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(.14 |
) |
In connection with the filing of our 2003 Form 10-K, the 2003 quarterly information was
restated for $6.1 million of previously recognized revenue related primarily to work performed on
undocumented or unapproved change orders and other matters which are being disputed by the
Companys clients. In addition, the quarterly information was restated for overstatements due to
irregularities in revenue recorded by the Canadian operations in the amount of $1.3 million. As a
result, revenue was restated by $272,000 in the first quarter, $1.3 million in the second quarter and $5.8 million in the third quarter. In
addition, the third quarter information was restated to accrue for costs on a loss job in the
amount of $462,000 and properly reflect a bonus to an officer which was earned in the third quarter
in the amount of approximately $246,000. As a result, cost of revenue was restated by $708,000 in
the third quarter of 2003.
In the fourth quarter 2003, the Company accrued losses incurred on construction projects in
the amount of approximately $7.4 million due to projected losses and changes in estimates made in
2004, recorded inventory adjustments in the amount of approximately $4.4 million as a result of
physical inventories, wrote-off an insurance receivable of $3.2 million, and increased insurance
reserves in the amount of $8.3 million. As stated in Note 2, the Company restated its results of
operations for the quarters ended March 31, 2003, June 30, 2003 and September 30, 2003 from amounts
previously reported.
In the fourth quarter 2004, the Company recorded $1.0 million of bad debt expense based on the
Companys write off history, the Company accrued losses incurred on construction projects in the
amount of approximately $1.1 million due to projected losses and changes in estimates made in 2005,
wrote off approximately $600,000 of fixed assets as a result of physical inventories and recorded
approximately $2.0 million in legal settlements and legal fees related to various litigation.
Note 18 Related Party Transactions
MasTec purchases, rents and leases equipment used in its business from a number of different
vendors, on a non-exclusive basis, including Neff Corp., in which Jorge Mas, the Companys Chairman
and Jose Mas, the Companys Vice-Chairman and Executive Vice President, are directors and owners of
a controlling interest. Juan Carlos Mas, the brother of Jorge and Jose Mas, is Chairman, Chief
Executive Officer, a director and a shareholder of Neff Corp. During the years ended December 31,
2002, 2003 and 2004, MasTec paid Neff approximately $26,000, $1.7 million and $1.2 million,
respectively for equipment purchases, rentals and leases. MasTec believes the amount paid to Neff
is equivalent to the payments that would have been made between unrelated parties for similar
transactions acting at arms length.
Effective as of August 27, 2002, MasTec and Jorge Mas entered into a split dollar agreement
wherein MasTec agreed to pay the premiums due on two life insurance policies with an aggregate face
amount of $50,000,000. Mr. Mas and his spouse are the insureds under the policies. Under the terms
of this agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the policies and is entitled to
recover all premiums it pays on the policies plus interest equal to four percent, compounded
annually, upon the death of the insureds. The remainder of the policies proceeds will be paid in
accordance with Mr. Mas designations. MasTec will make the premium
49
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
payments until the agreement is
terminated, which occurs upon any of the following events: (i) total cessation of MasTecs
business, (ii) bankruptcy, receivership or dissolution of MasTec, or (iii) a change of control of
MasTec.
Additionally, effective as of September 13, 2002, MasTec and Jorge Mas entered into a second
split dollar agreement (as amended on December 1, 2002) wherein MasTec agreed to pay the premiums
due on a life insurance policy with a face amount of $80,000,000, $60,000,000 of which is subject
to the agreement and the remaining $20,000,000 is deemed to be key-man insurance payable to MasTec
and falls outside of the agreement. Jorge Mas is the insured under this policy. Under the terms of
this agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the policy and is entitled to recover
all premiums it pays on the portion of the policy subject to the agreement, plus interest equal to
four percent, compounded annually, upon the death of the insured. MasTec will make the premium
payments until the agreement is terminated, which occurs upon any of the following events: (i)
total cessation of MasTecs business, (ii) bankruptcy, receivership or dissolution of MasTec, or
(iii) a change of control of MasTec. An amount equal to $60,000,000 of the policys proceeds will
be paid in accordance with Jorge Mas designations. Any remainder of the proceeds will be paid to
MasTec. In 2002, 2003 and 2004, MasTec paid $1,340,400, $1,303,783 and $1,135,092 in premiums in
connection with the split dollar agreements for Jorge Mas.
In 2002, MasTec paid $75,000 to Mr. Shanfelter related to a life insurance policy which was
cancelled in April 2002. MasTec was to be reimbursed by the insurance company upon Mr.
Shanfelters death. Accordingly a receivable was recorded at the time of the payments. During the
year ended December 31, 2004 the Company wrote off the receivable balance because the policy was
cancelled and all payments became taxable to Mr. Shanfelter.
On November 1, 2002, MasTec and Austin Shanfelter entered into a split dollar agreement
wherein MasTec agreed to pay the premiums due on a life insurance policy with an aggregate face
amount of $18,000,000. Mr. Shanfelter and his spouse are the insureds under the policy. Under the
terms of this agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the policy and is entitled,
upon the death of the insureds, to recover all premiums it pays on the policy plus interest equal
to four percent, compounded annually. The
remainder of the policys proceeds will be paid in accordance with Mr. Shanfelters
designations. MasTec will make the premium payments for the term of the agreement or until the
agreement is terminated, which occurs upon any of the following events: (i) total cessation of
MasTecs business, (ii) bankruptcy, receivership or dissolution of MasTec, or (iii) the six year
anniversary of the agreement. In 2002, 2003 and 2004, MasTec paid approximately $0, $500,000 and
$500,000, respectively in premiums in connection with the split dollar agreement for Mr. Shanfelter
and his family.
Effective as of July 16, 2004, MasTec and Jose Mas entered into a split dollar agreement
wherein MasTec agreed to pay premiums on a life insurance policy with an aggregate face amount of
$5.0 million. Under the terms of the agreement, MasTec is the sole owner and beneficiary of the
policy and is entitled to recover all premiums it pays on the policy plus interest equal to 3.5%,
compounded annually, upon the death of the insured. The remainder of the policys proceeds will be
paid in accordance with Mr. Mas designations. MasTec has agreed to make the premium payments
until at least July 15, 2009. In 2004, MasTec paid approximately $150,000 in premiums in
connection with the split dollar agreement for Mr. Jose Mas.
On January 1, 2002, MasTec entered into an employment agreement with Austin J. Shanfelter
relating to his employment as President and Chief Executive Officer. The agreement expires on
December 31, 2005 unless earlier terminated, and provides that Mr. Shanfelter will be paid an
annual salary of $600,000, an initial bonus of $100,000 prior to March 31, 2003 and deferred
compensation of $2,000,000. The agreement also provides for a bonus to be paid pursuant to an
incentive performance bonus plan to be agreed upon and stock options pursuant to MasTecs stock
option plans. Following termination of employment, the agreement provides for a two-year consulting
period at $500,000 per year. Additionally, if there is a change of control of MasTec during the
employment term, the executive will be entitled to all of the unpaid portion of his salary for the
remaining term of the agreement, to the consulting fees, any unpaid portion of the initial bonus
and the deferred compensation amount and to immediate vesting of any previously unvested options.
The agreement also contains gross-up for any excise taxes, confidentiality, non-competition and
non-solicitation provisions.
On January 1, 2002, MasTec entered into an employment agreement with Donald P. Weinstein
relating to his employment as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. On January 7,
2004 (but effective as of December 1, 2003), the Company entered into an amended employment
agreement with Mr. Weinstein. The agreement was for a term of three years and provided that Mr.
Weinstein would be paid an annual base salary of $300,000 (with annual cost of living increases).
Additionally, Mr. Weinstein was entitled to receive a total of $600,000 of deferred compensation
over the term of the contract and was to be entitled to participate in a bonus plan for senior
management, and would be entitled to a minimum annual performance bonus of $50,000 per year. Mr.
50
MASTEC, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)
Weinstein resigned effective March 11, 2004. In connection therewith, the Company entered into a
severance agreement with Mr. Weinstein pursuant to which the Company paid him his base salary of
$300,000 through December 2004, provide him with certain employee and insurance benefits and
provide for the vesting of his stock options. The severance agreement was approved by the
Compensation Committee on July 16, 2004. As a result of Mr. Weinsteins severance agreement, the
Company recorded $199,500 in stock compensation expense in the year ended December 31, 2004 related
to the extension of the exercise period on Mr. Weinsteins stock options. In addition, a severance
accrual was recorded for $300,000 as of March 11, 2004 which has been reduced as payments have been
made.
In July 2002, MasTec entered into an employment agreement with Eric J. Tveter as Executive
Vice President and Chief Operations Officer with a two year term at an annual base salary of
$300,000 (with annual cost of living increases) and a grant of 50,000 stock options, a guaranteed
bonus for the year 2002 equal to one half of his base salary paid to him during the year 2002 and
the right to participate in MasTecs bonus plan for senior management beginning January 1, 2003.
The agreement also contained noncompete and nonsolicitation provisions for a period of two years
following the term of the agreement. Mr. Tveter resigned his position with the company on March 22,
2004. In connection therewith, we entered into a severance agreement with Mr. Tveter pursuant to
which the Company paid him severance of $33,134 during 2004, paid his regular salary through July
14, 2004 at an annual rate of $306,837, provided him with certain employee benefits and provided
for the vesting of his stock options. The Compensation Committee approved Mr. Tveters severance
agreement on April 15, 2004 which will be the new measurement date of his stock options. As a
result of Mr. Tveters severance agreement, the Company recorded approximately $216,800 in stock
compensation expense in the year ended December 31, 2004 related to the extension of the exercise
period on Mr. Tveters stock options. In addition, a severance accrual was recorded as of March
22, 2004 for approximately $173,000 which has been reduced as payments have been made.
On October 12, 2004, MasTec entered into an employment agreement with C. Robert Campbell
relating to his employment as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. The agreement
expires on January 17, 2007 unless earlier terminated, and provides that Mr. Campbell will be paid
an annual salary of $350,000 and an initial bonus of $75,000 upon execution of the
employment agreement. The agreement also provides for a minimum annual performance bonus of
$50,000 per year and stock options pursuant to MasTecs stock option plans. Following termination
of employment without cause or good reason, the executive will receive his base salary from the
date of termination for a period of twelve months. If the agreement is terminated by the Company
not renewing or extending the employment agreement then the executive shall be entitled to
severance benefits for a period of six months from the termination date. If there is a change of
control of MasTec during the employment term, the executive will be entitled to one and a half
times the unpaid portion of his salary for the greater of twelve months or the remaining term of
the agreement and to immediate vesting of any previously unvested options. The agreement also
contains confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation provisions.
On January 3, 2005, MasTec entered into an employment agreement with Gregory S. Floerke
relating to his employment as Chief Operations Officer. The agreement expires on January 2, 2007
unless earlier terminated, and provides that Mr. Floerke will be paid an annual salary of $300,000
during the first year of employment and $350,000 during the second year of employment. The
agreement also provides for stock options pursuant to MasTecs stock option plans. Following
termination of employment without cause or good reason the executive will receive his base salary
for 12 months after the date of termination. If the agreement is not renewed by the Company, the
executive is entitled to severance benefits for a period of six months from the termination date.
The agreement also contains confidentiality, non-competition and non-solicitation provisions.
51
Item 9A. Controls and Procedure
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we carried out an
evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief
Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation
of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and
procedures, our management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed
and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives and
are subject to certain limitations, including the exercise of judgment by individuals, the
difficulty in identifying unlikely future events, and the difficulty in eliminating misconduct
completely. Based upon that evaluation, we concluded that as of December 31, 2004, our disclosure
controls and procedures were ineffective to ensure that information required to be disclosed in
reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act were recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the Securities and Exchange
Commission or that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including
our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to allow for timely decisions regarding
required disclosure. The basis for this determination was that, as discussed below, we have
identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, which we view as
an integral part of our disclosure controls and procedures.
Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Our management is
responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as
such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f). Under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial
officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial
reporting based on the framework in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. The Companys internal control over
financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance to management and to the Companys
Board of Directors regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation and fair
presentation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles. The Companys internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that:
(i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company;
(ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,
and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and
(iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized
acquisition, use or disposition of the Companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
As of the end of the period covered by this report, the Company carried out an evaluation,
under the supervision and with the participation of the Companys management, including the
Companys Chief Executive Officer and the Companys Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness
of the design and operation of the Companys internal control over financial reporting. In making
this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework. The
results of managements assessment and review were reported to the Audit Committee of the Board of
Directors.
Management has assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2004. In making its assessment of internal control over financial reporting,
management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations, or COSO, of
the Treadway Commission in Internal Control-Integrated Framework. Because of the one material
weakness described below, management believes that, as of December 31, 2004, our internal control
over financial reporting was not effective.
In the course of managements investigation, management noted one matter involving internal
control and its operation that management considered a material weakness under standards
established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Reportable conditions involve
matters relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control that
could
52
adversely affect our ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data
consistent with the assertions of management in the consolidated financial statements. A material
weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the internal
control components does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that misstatements caused by
errors or fraud in amounts that would be material in relation to the consolidated financial
statements being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in the
normal course of performing their assigned functions.
Managements consideration of internal control would not necessarily disclose all matters that
might be reportable conditions and, accordingly, would not necessarily disclose all reportable
conditions that are also considered to be material weaknesses as defined above. However, management
did identify weaknesses in internal controls involving inventory practices and policies in the ITS
division, with respect to inventory pricing on receipt and the related costs of sales, and
inventory tracking prior to sale or use. Inventory at December 31, 2004 related to ITS was
approximately $27.7 million. Management believes this constitutes a material weakness in internal
control over the financial reporting process, including the closing process, as it relates to this
division. As a result of this weakness, a significant adjustment to correct for this weakness was
required and has been recorded in preparing our 2004 financial statements.
Since December 31, 2004, we have continued to improve the system of internal controls related
to inventory by implementing the inventory Oracle module into our financial system and testing the
system to ensure it is accurately capturing the correct prices and quantities. Once this system
can be relied upon, management will no longer be required to perform manual procedures to eliminate
this risk of misstatement. An effective internal control framework requires the commitment of
management to require competence, diligence, and integrity on the part of its employees. Control
activities include policies and procedures adopted by management to ensure the execution of
management directives, and to help advance the successful achievement of our objectives.
Scope of Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting In our Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2004 previously filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on March 31, 2005, we incorrectly noted a scope limitation in our assessment regarding the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting due to our failure to test the
internal control over financial reporting of both our Network Services division, which we accounted
for as a discontinued operation in 2004, and Globetec, Inc., a company that is 51% owned by us. In
our Form 10-K filed on March 31, 2005, we disclosed that this scope limitation was based on the
insignificance of these operations (within the meaning of Rule 11-01(b) of Regulation S-X) as well
as, with respect to Globetec, our inability to dictate or modify the controls of that entity.
Since we own 51% of Globetec and have the contractual right to appoint a majority of the managers
on Globetecs Board of Managers, we were incorrect in concluding that we are unable to dictate or
modify the controls of Globetec. In addition, while the entities insignificance is a proper
reason for excluding such entities from our internal control over financial reporting testing, we
should not have characterized this exclusion from our internal control over financial reporting
testing as a scope limitation.
We determined that both our Network Services divisions and Globetecs account balances and
processes should be excluded from our internal control over financial reporting evaluation process
based on a materiality and scoping analysis that we performed similar to that prescribed by
paragraphs 22 and 23 of Auditing Standard No. 2 An Audit of Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting Performed in Conjunction with An Audit of the Financial Statement. Pursuant to this
materiality and scoping analysis, we determined that the account balances and processes of each of
our Network Services division and Globetech were insignificant from a quantitative and qualitative
perspective. We based our conclusion on the fact that our Network Services divisions and
Globetecs combined net assets, revenues and net loss as of and for the year ended December 31,
2004 were $7.8 million, $24.7 million and $1.8 million, respectively, each of which is less than 4%
of the related line items on our financial statements, and therefore individually and in the
aggregate immaterial to our financial position and operations. We therefore determined that the
lack of testing of the internal controls over financial reporting of our Network Services division
and Globetec would not lead to a material misstatement of our financial statements.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting There were no changes in our internal
control over financial reporting identified in connection with the evaluation required by paragraph
(d) of Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 or 15d-15 that occurred during our last fiscal quarter that have
materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over
financial reporting.
Our independent auditors have issued an attestation report on managements assessment of our
internal control over financial reporting. That report appears below.
Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm
53
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of
MasTec, Inc.
We have audited managements assessment, included in the accompanying Managements Annual
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A, that MasTec, Inc. did
not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, because
of the effect of the material weakness identified in managements assessment, based on the criteria
established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). MasTec, Inc.s management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on managements assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the companys internal
control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was
maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, evaluating managements assessment, testing and evaluating the
design and operation effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. A companys internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and
procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately
and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and
expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and
directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the companys assets that could have
a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent
or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that
the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
A material weakness is a control deficiency, or combination of control deficiencies, that
results in more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim
financial statements will not be prevented or detected. The following material weakness was
identified and included in managements assessment:
Management identified weaknesses in internal controls involving inventory practices and
policies in the Companys ITS division, with respect to inventory pricing on receipt and
the related cost of revenue, and inventory tracking prior to sale or use. Management
believes this constitutes a material weakness in internal control over the financial
reporting process, including the Companys closing process, as it relates to this division.
As a result of this weakness, a significant adjustment to correct for this weakness was
required and has been recorded by the Company in preparing the 2004 financial statements.
Management has undertaken a review of the related account and believes that it has
identified and corrected any misstatement resulting from this material weakness.
Since December 31, 2004, the Company has improved the system of internal controls related
to inventory by continuing to implement the Oracle inventory module into the Companys
financial system and testing the system to ensure it is accurately capturing the correct
prices and quantities. Once this system can be relied upon, management will not need to
perform as many manual procedures.
This material weakness was considered in determining the nature, timing, and extent of audit
tests applied in our audit of the 2004 financial statements, and this report does not affect our
report dated March 29th, 2005 on those financial statements, which expressed an
unqualified opinion.
In our opinion, managements assessment that MasTec, Inc. did not maintain effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, is fairly stated, in all material
respects, based on the criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by
COSO. Also, in our opinion, because of the effect of the material weakness described above on the
achievement
54
of the objectives of the control criteria, MasTec, Inc. has not maintained effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on the criteria established in
Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the COSO.
/s/ BDO Seidman, LLP
Miami, FL
March 29th, 2005
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
(a) 1. Financial Statements The consolidated financial statements and the reports of the
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firms are listed on page 44 through 73.
2. Financial Statements Schedules The financial statement schedule information required by
Item 14(a)(2) is included as part of Note 5 Accounts Receivable of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements.
3. Exhibits including those incorporated by reference:
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
3.1
|
|
Articles of Incorporation, filed as Appendix B to our definitive Proxy Statement for
our 1998 Annual Meeting of Stockholders dated April 14, 1998 and filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on April 14, 1998, and incorporated by reference
herein |
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Bylaws of MasTec, Inc. Amended and Restated as of May 30,
2003, filed as Exhibit 3.1 to our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 and
filed with the Commission on August 14, 2003 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Indenture, dated as of February 4, 1998 between MasTec and First Trust national
Association, as trustee relating to our 7.75% Senior Subordinated Notes Due 2008,
filed as Exhibit 4.2 to our Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed on February 13,
1998 (file no. 333-46361) and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
1994 Stock Incentive Plan filed as an Appendix to our definitive Proxy Statement for
our 1993 Annual and Special Meeting of Stockholders, dated February 10, 1994 and
filed with the Commission on February 11, 1994 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
1994 Stock Option Plan for Non-employee Directors filed as an Appendix to our
definitive Proxy Statement for our 1993 Annual and Special Meeting of Stockholders,
dated February 10, 1994 and filed with the Commission on February 11, 1994 and
incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
1999 Non-Qualified Employee Stock Option Plan, as amended October 4, 1999, filed as
Exhibit 10.4 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002
and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as of January 22, 2002 between MasTec,
certain of its subsidiaries, and Fleet Financial Corporation as agent filed as
Exhibit 10.2 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001,
and filed with the Commission on March 28, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
Assumption and Amendment Agreement to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated
February 7, 2002 filed as Exhibit 10.3 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2001, and filed with the Commission on March 28, 2002 and
incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to the Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as of October
25, 2002 between MasTec, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries, and Fleet Financial
Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10.7 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
Amendment No. 3 and Consent to the Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as
of November 1, 2002 between MasTec, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries, and Fleet
Financial Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10-8 to our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein |
55
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
10.9
|
|
Amendment No. 4 to the Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as of March 6,
2003 between MasTec, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries, and Fleet Financial
Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10.9 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.11+
|
|
Employment Agreement dated September 27, 2002, between MasTec, Inc. and Austin J.
Shanfelter, filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 20,
2002, and filed with the Commission on November 14, 2002 and incorporated by
reference herein |
|
|
|
10.12+
|
|
Severance Agreement with Jose Sariego dated as of December 31, 2002, filed as Exhibit
10.14 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 and
incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.13+
|
|
Split-Dollar Agreement effective August 27, 2002 between MasTec, Inc. and Jorge Mas,
filed as Exhibit 10.15 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.14+
|
|
Split-Dollar Agreement effective September 13, 2002 between MasTec, Inc. and Jorge
Mas, filed as Exhibit 10.16 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.15+
|
|
First Amendment to the Split-Dollar
Agreement dated September 13, 2002 between MasTec,
Inc. and Jorge Mas, filed as Exhibit 10.17 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.16+
|
|
Split-Dollar Agreement effective September 13, 2002 between MasTec, Inc. and Austin
J. Shanfelter, filed as Exhibit 10.18 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2002 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.17
|
|
2003 Employee Stock Incentive Plan, filed as Appendix B to our definitive proxy
statement for our 2003 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, dated April 25, 2003 and
incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.18
|
|
Amendment No. 5 to our Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as of September
18, 2003 between MasTec, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries and Fleet Financial
Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10.1 to our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2003 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.19
|
|
Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Incentive Plan for Non-Employees, filed as Appendix A
to our definitive proxy statement for a Special Meeting of Shareholders, dated
November 17, 2003 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.21
|
|
Amendment No. 6 to the Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as of December
29, 2003 between MasTec, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries and Fleet Financial
Corporation as agent, filed as Exhibit 10.2 to our Registration Statement on Form S-3
(file no. 333-111845) and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.22
|
|
Amendment No. 7 to the Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated as of July 22,
2004 between MasTec, Inc., certain of its subsidiaries and Fleet Financial
Corporation, as agent, filed as Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.23+
|
|
Separation Agreement and General Release entered into as of March 22, 2004 between
MasTec, Inc. and Eric J. Tveter, filed as Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.24+
|
|
Separation Agreement and General Release entered into as of March 11, 2004 between
MasTec, Inc. and Donald P. Weinstein, filed as Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.25+
|
|
Separation Agreement and General Release entered into as of August 7, 2001 between
MasTec, Inc. and Joel Citron, filed as Exhibit 10.22 to our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.26
|
|
Amendment No. 8 to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated October 4, 2004,
filed as Appendix A to our Form 8-K filed October 8, 2004 |
|
|
|
10.27+
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated October 12, 2004 between C. Robert Campbell and MasTec,
Inc. , filed as Appendix A to our Form 8-K filed October 21, 2004 |
|
|
|
10.28
|
|
Amendment No. 9 to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated December 29, 2004,
filed as Exhibit 10.28 to our Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2004
and incorporated by reference herein |
|
|
|
10.29+
|
|
Employment Agreement dated January 3, 2005 between Gregory S. Floerke and MasTec, Inc. |
|
|
|
10.30+**
|
|
Split-Dollar Agreement effective July 16, 2004 between MasTec, Inc and Jose Mas |
56
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
10.31**
|
|
Amendment No. 10 to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement dated March 17, 2005 |
|
|
|
21.1**
|
|
Subsidiaries of MasTec |
|
|
|
23.1*
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
(BDO Seidman LLP) |
|
|
|
23.2*
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (Ernst & Young LLP) |
|
|
|
31*
|
|
Certifications required by Section 302(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
32*
|
|
Certifications required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Exhibits filed with this Form 10-K/A |
|
** |
|
Previously filed with the Form 10-K |
|
+ |
|
Management contract or compensation plan arrangement |
57
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized, in the City of Miami, State of Florida, on August 3, 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MASTEC, INC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ AUSTIN J. SHANFELTER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Austin J. Shanfelter
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ C. ROBERT CAMPBELL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Robert Campbell
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|
|
58