2011 10-K Amendment Document
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
___________________________
FORM 10-K/A
Amendment No. 1
x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011
OR
o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from _____ to _____
Commission File No. 333-173250
REALOGY HOLDINGS CORP
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Commission File Nos. 333-173250, 333-173254 and 333-148153
REALOGY CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
| | | |
| Delaware (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | 20-8050955 and 20-4381990 (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) | |
| One Campus Drive Parsippany, NJ (Address of principal executive offices) | 07054 (Zip Code) | |
| (973) 407-2000 (Registrants' telephone number, including area code) | |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: NONE
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: NONE
___________________________
Indicate by check mark if the Registrants are well-known seasoned issuers, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o No x
Indicate by check mark if the Registrants are not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrants (1) have filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes o No x
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrants have submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrants were required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrants’ knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrants are large accelerated filers, accelerated filers, non-accelerated filers, or smaller reporting companies. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
|
| | | | |
Large accelerated filer o Non-accelerated filer x (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | | | | Accelerated filer o Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrants are a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No x
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates as of the close of business on December 31, 2011 was zero.
There were 4,200 shares of Class A Common Stock, $0.01 par value, and 8,017,080 shares of Class B Common Stock, $0.01 par value, of Realogy Holdings Corp. outstanding as of March 2, 2012. There were 100 shares of Common Stock, $0.01 par value, of Realogy Corporation outstanding as of March 2, 2012.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
None.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
EXPLANATORY NOTE
This Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A amends the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Realogy Holdings Corp. ("Holdings") (formerly known as Domus Holdings Corp.) and its indirect, wholly owned subsidiary, Realogy Corporation ("Realogy"), for the year ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 2, 2012 (the “Original Form 10-K”). Except as otherwise indicated or unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “we,” “us,” “our,” “our company” and the “Company” refer to Holdings and its consolidated subsidiaries. Except as otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Original Form 10-K.
In connection with the preparation of Holdings' initial public offering of shares filed on a Registration Statement on Form S-1, we identified and corrected an error in the manner in which we had allocated the purchase price paid by Apollo subsequent to their 2007 acquisition. Specifically, we inappropriately identified the discounted cash flows generated from the Real Estate Franchise Services franchise agreement with NRT as a separately identifiable indefinite lived intangible asset. We concluded that the value ascribed to this agreement should have been attributed to the Real Estate Franchise Services business unit as goodwill. Accordingly, we corrected our error through the elimination of the Real Estate Franchise Services franchise agreement with NRT intangible asset and increased the value associated with our goodwill, which resulted in a concurrent decrease in our deferred income tax liability. In accordance with accounting guidance found in ASC 250-10 (SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 99, Materiality), we assessed the materiality of the error and concluded that the error was not material to any of our previously issued financial statements. The non-cash error had no impact to our consolidated statement of operations or cash flows for any of the periods presented in the audited financial statements.
On September 11, 2012, the Board of Directors of Holdings approved an amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation to effect a change in its name of Domus Holdings Corp. to "Realogy Holdings Corp.", to amend and restate its authorized capital stock and to approve a reverse stock split of the Company's Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock at a ratio of 1 to 25 (the “Reverse Stock Split”). On the same day, the stockholders of Holdings approved the foregoing amendments to Holdings' Certificate of Incorporation.
On September 27, 2012, Holdings filed a Certificate of Amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation (the “Certificate of Amendment”) with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware to effect the change in authorized capital stock, the Reverse Stock Split and the name change. The Certificate of Amendment provides that the Reverse Stock Split became effective upon filing, at which time every twenty five (25) issued and outstanding shares of the Company's Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock were automatically combined into one (1) issued and outstanding share of the respective class of Holdings' Common Stock, without any change in par value. Immediately following the Reverse Stock Split, there were 4,200 shares of Class A Common Stock issued and outstanding and 8,017,080 shares of Class B Common stock issued and outstanding. Holdings did not issue any fractional shares in connection with the Reverse Stock Split, but rounded those shares up to the next whole share. Pursuant to the terms of the Convertible Notes, the stated conversion rates applicable to each series of Convertible Notes were adjusted to reflect the Reverse Stock Split. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, the number of shares reserved thereunder, as well as the number of options outstanding and their stated exercise prices, was adjusted to reflect the Reverse Stock Split. All amounts and per share data presented in the accompanying consolidated financial statements and related notes give retroactive effect to the Reverse Stock Split for all periods presented.
No other information in the Original Form 10-K is amended hereby. Except for the amended disclosure described above, the information in this Form 10-K/A has not been updated to reflect events that occurred after March 2, 2012, the filing date of the Original Form 10-K. Accordingly, the Amendment should be read in conjunction with our other filings made with the SEC subsequent to the filing of the Original Form 10-K.
|
| | |
| | |
| |
| | |
PART II | |
| | |
Item 6. | | |
Item 7. | | |
Item 8. | | |
| | |
PART III | |
| | |
Item 11. | | |
Item 12. | | |
| | |
PART IV | |
| | |
Item 15. | | |
| | |
| |
| |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 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, on the 8th of October 2012.
REALOGY HOLDINGS CORP.
and
REALOGY CORPORATION
(Registrants)
| |
Title: | Executive Vice President, |
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
PART II
Item 6. Selected Financial Data.
The following table presents our selected historical consolidated financial data and operating statistics. The consolidated statement of operations data for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein. The statement of operations data for the year ended December 31, 2008 and the periods from April 10, 2007 through December 31, 2007 and January 1, 2007 through April 9, 2007 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 have been derived from our consolidated financial statements not included elsewhere herein.
Holdings, the indirect parent of Realogy, does not conduct any operations other than with respect to its indirect ownership of Realogy. Intermediate, the parent of Realogy, does not conduct any operations other than with respect to its ownership of Realogy. Any expenses related to stock compensation issued by Holdings to the employees or directors of Realogy or franchise taxes incurred by Holdings are recorded in Realogy’s financial statements. As a result, there are no material differences between Holdings’ and Realogy’s financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008 and no material differences between Intermediate’s and Realogy’s financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008.
Although Realogy continued as the same legal entity after the Merger, the financial statements for 2007 are presented for two periods: January 1 through April 9, 2007 (the “Predecessor Period” or “Predecessor,” as context requires) and April 10 through December 31, 2007 (the “Successor Period” or “Successor,” as context requires), which relate to the period preceding the Merger and the period succeeding the Merger, respectively. The results of the Successor are not comparable to the results of the Predecessor due to the difference in the basis of presentation of purchase accounting as compared to historical cost. The consolidated statement of operations data for the period January 1, 2007 to April 9, 2007 are derived from the audited financial statements of the Predecessor not included elsewhere in this Annual Report, and the consolidated statement of operations data for the period April 10, 2007 to December 31, 2007 are derived from the audited financial statements of the Successor not included elsewhere in this Annual Report. In the opinion of management, the statement of operations data for 2007 include all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring accruals) necessary for a fair presentation of the results of operations as of the dates and for the periods indicated. The results for periods of less than a full year are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for any interim period or for a full year.
The selected historical consolidated financial data and operating statistics presented below should be read in conjunction with our annual consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere herein. Our annual consolidated financial information may not be indicative of our future performance.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Successor | | | | | Predecessor |
| As of or for the Year Ended December 31, | | Revised For the Period April 10 Through December 31, 2007 | | | For the Period From January 1 Through April 9, 2007 |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 | | Revised 2008 | | | |
| (In millions, except operating statistics) | | | |
Statement of Operations Data: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net revenue | $ | 4,093 |
| | $ | 4,090 |
| | $ | 3,932 |
| | $ | 4,725 |
| | $ | 4,472 |
| | | $ | 1,492 |
|
Total expenses | 4,526 |
| | 4,084 |
| | 4,266 |
| | 6,806 |
| | 5,678 |
| | | 1,560 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests | (433 | ) | | 6 |
| | (334 | ) | | (2,081 | ) | | (1,206 | ) | | | (68 | ) |
Income tax expense (benefit) | 32 |
| | 133 |
| | (50 | ) | | (345 | ) | | (271 | ) | | | (23 | ) |
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated entities | (26 | ) | | (30 | ) | | (24 | ) | | 28 |
| | (2 | ) | | | (1 | ) |
Net loss | (439 | ) | | (97 | ) | | (260 | ) | | (1,764 | ) | | (933 | ) | | | (44 | ) |
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) | | (1 | ) | | (2 | ) | | | — |
|
Net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (262 | ) | | $ | (1,765 | ) | | $ | (935 | ) | | | $ | (44 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance Sheet Data revised: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Securitization assets (a) | $ | 366 |
| | $ | 393 |
| | $ | 364 |
| | $ | 845 |
| | $ | 1,300 |
| | | |
Total assets | 7,350 |
| | 7,569 |
| | 7,581 |
| | 8,452 |
| | 10,530 |
| | | |
Securitization obligations | 327 |
| | 331 |
| | 305 |
| | 703 |
| | 1,014 |
| | | |
Long-term debt | 7,150 |
| | 6,892 |
| | 6,706 |
| | 6,760 |
| | 6,239 |
| | | |
Equity (deficit) (b) | (1,499 | ) | | (1,063 | ) | | (972 | ) | | (731 | ) | | 1,065 |
| | | |
NRT Franchise Agreement - Revision of Prior Period Financial Statements
In connection with the preparation of our Registration Statement, we identified and corrected an error related to the allocation of the purchase price paid by Apollo in April 2007. Specifically, we previously identified the discounted cash flows generated from the Real Estate Franchise Services franchise agreement with NRT as a separately identifiable indefinite lived intangible asset. We have concluded that the value ascribed to this agreement should have been attributed to the Real Estate Franchise Services business unit as goodwill. Accordingly, we corrected our error through the elimination of the Real Estate Franchise Services franchise agreement with the NRT intangible asset and increased the value associated with our goodwill, which resulted in a concurrent decrease in our deferred income tax liability. In connection with these changes, we updated our impairment analyses which were completed in 2007 and 2008 and the revisions are reflected in the 2007 and 2008 information above. These revisions had no impact on our 2011, 2010 or 2009 consolidated statement of operations or cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 or 2009.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 | | 2008 | | 2007 |
Operating Statistics: | | | | | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services (c) | | | | | | | | | |
Closed homesale sides (d) | 909,610 |
| | 922,341 |
| | 983,516 |
| | 995,622 |
| | 1,221,206 |
|
Average homesale price (e) | $ | 198,268 |
| | $ | 198,076 |
| | $ | 190,406 |
| | $ | 214,271 |
| | $ | 230,346 |
|
Average homesale brokerage commission rate (f) | 2.55 | % | | 2.54 | % | | 2.55 | % | | 2.52 | % | | 2.49 | % |
Net effective royalty rate (g) | 4.84 | % | | 5.00 | % | | 5.10 | % | | 5.12 | % | | 5.03 | % |
Royalty per side (h) | $ | 256 |
| | $ | 262 |
| | $ | 257 |
| | $ | 287 |
| | $ | 298 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services (i) | | | | | | | | | |
Closed homesale sides (d) | 254,522 |
| | 255,287 |
| | 273,817 |
| | 275,090 |
| | 325,719 |
|
Average homesale price (e) | $ | 426,402 |
| | $ | 435,500 |
| | $ | 390,688 |
| | $ | 479,301 |
| | $ | 534,056 |
|
Average homesale brokerage commission rate (f) | 2.50 | % | | 2.48 | % | | 2.51 | % | | 2.48 | % | | 2.47 | % |
Gross commission income per side (j) | $ | 11,461 |
| | $ | 11,571 |
| | $ | 10,519 |
| | $ | 12,612 |
| | $ | 13,806 |
|
Relocation Services | | | | | | | | | |
Initiations (k) | 153,269 |
| | 148,304 |
| | 114,684 |
| | 136,089 |
| | 132,343 |
|
Referrals (l) | 72,169 |
| | 69,605 |
| | 64,995 |
| | 71,743 |
| | 78,828 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | | | | | | | | | |
Purchasing title and closing units (m) | 93,245 |
| | 94,290 |
| | 104,689 |
| | 110,462 |
| | 138,824 |
|
Refinance title and closing units (n) | 62,850 |
| | 62,225 |
| | 69,927 |
| | 35,893 |
| | 37,204 |
|
Average price per closing unit (o) | $ | 1,409 |
| | $ | 1,386 |
| | $ | 1,317 |
| | $ | 1,500 |
| | $ | 1,471 |
|
_______________
| |
(a) | Represents the portion of relocation receivables and advances, relocation properties held for sale and other related assets that collateralize our securitization obligations. Refer to Note 8, “Short and Long-Term Debt” in the consolidated financial statements for further information. |
| |
(b) | For the successor period Equity (deficit) is comprised of the capital contribution of $2,001 million from affiliates of Apollo and co-investors offset by the net loss for the period. |
| |
(c) | These amounts include only those relating to third-party franchisees and do not include amounts relating to the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment. |
| |
(d) | A closed homesale side represents either the “buy” side or the “sell” side of a homesale transaction. |
| |
(e) | Represents the average selling price of closed homesale transactions. |
| |
(f) | Represents the average commission rate earned on either the “buy” side or “sell” side of a homesale transaction. |
| |
(g) | Represents the average percentage of our franchisees’ commission revenue (excluding NRT) paid to the Real Estate Franchise Services segment as a royalty. The net effective royalty rate does not include the effect of non-standard incentives granted to some franchisees. |
| |
(h) | Represents net domestic royalties earned from our franchisees (excluding NRT) divided by the total number of our franchisees’ closed homesale sides. |
| |
(i) | Our real estate brokerage business has a significant concentration of offices and transactions in geographic regions where home prices are at the higher end of the U.S. real estate market, particularly the east and west coasts. The real estate franchise business has franchised offices that are more widely dispersed across the United States than our real estate brokerage operations. Accordingly, operating results and homesale statistics may differ between our brokerage and franchise businesses based upon geographic presence and the corresponding homesale activity in each geographic region. |
| |
(j) | Represents gross commission income divided by closed homesale sides. |
| |
(k) | Represents the total number of transferees served by the relocation services business. The amounts presented for the year ended December 31, 2010 include 26,087 initiations as a result of the acquisition of Primacy in January 2010. |
| |
(l) | Represents the number of referrals from which we earned revenue from real estate brokers. The amounts presented for the year ended December 31, 2010 include 4,997 referrals as a result of the acquisition of Primacy in January 2010. |
| |
(m) | Represents the number of title and closing units processed as a result of home purchases. |
| |
(n) | Represents the number of title and closing units processed as a result of homeowners refinancing their home loans. |
| |
(o) | Represents the average fee we earn on purchase title and refinancing title units. |
In presenting the financial data above in conformity with general accepted accounting principles, we are required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported. See “Item 7—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Critical Accounting Policies” for a detailed discussion of the accounting policies that we believe require subjective and complex judgments that could potentially affect reported results.
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes thereto included elsewhere herein. Unless otherwise noted, all dollar amounts in tables are in millions. Holdings, the indirect parent of Realogy, does not conduct any operations other than with respect to its indirect ownership of Realogy. Any expenses related to stock compensation issued by Holdings to the employees or directors of Realogy or franchise taxes incurred by Holdings are recorded in Realogy’s financial statements. As a result, there are no material differences between Holdings’ and Realogy’s financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 or 2009. This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contains forward-looking statements. See “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “Item 1A - Risk Factors” for a discussion of the uncertainties, risks and assumptions associated with these statements. Actual results may differ materially from those contained in any forward- looking statements.
Overview
We are a global provider of real estate and relocation services and report our operations in the following four segments:
| |
• | Real Estate Franchise Services (known as Realogy Franchise Group or RFG) - franchises the Century 21®, Coldwell Banker®, ERA®, Sotheby’s International Realty®, Coldwell Banker Commercial® and Better Homes and Gardens® Real Estate brand names. As of December 31, 2011, our franchise system had approximately 14,000 franchised and company owned offices and 245,800 independent sales associates operating under our brands in the U.S. and 100 other countries and territories around the world, which included approximately 725 of our company owned and operated brokerage offices with approximately 42,100 independent sales associates. We franchise our real estate brokerage franchise systems to real estate brokerage businesses that are independently owned and operated. We provide operational and administrative services and certain systems and tools that are designed to help our franchisees serve their customers and attract new, or retain existing, independent sales associates. Such services include national and local advertising programs, listing and agent-recruitment tools, including technology, training and purchasing discounts through our preferred vendor programs. Franchise revenue principally consists of royalty and marketing fees from our franchisees. The royalty received is primarily based on a percentage of the franchisee’s gross commission income. Royalty fees are accrued as the underlying franchisee revenue is earned (upon closing of the homesale transaction). Annual volume incentives given to certain franchisees on royalty fees are recorded as a reduction to revenue and are accrued for in relative proportion to the recognition of the underlying gross franchise revenue. In the U.S. and generally in Canada, we employ a direct franchising model, however, in other parts of the world, we usually employ a master franchise model, whereby we contract with a qualified, experienced third party to build a franchise enterprise. Under the master franchise model, we typically enter into long term franchise agreements (often 25 years in duration) and receive an initial area development fee and ongoing royalties. Royalty increases or decreases are recognized with little corresponding increase or decrease in expenses due to the operating efficiency within the franchise operations. In addition to royalties received from our independently owned franchisees, our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment pays royalties to the Real Estate Franchise Services segment. |
| |
• | Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services (known as NRT) - operates a full-service real estate brokerage business principally under the Coldwell Banker®, ERA®, Corcoran Group® and Sotheby’s International Realty® brand names. As an owner-operator of real estate brokerages, we assist home buyers and sellers in listing, marketing, selling and finding homes. We earn commissions for these services, which are recorded upon the closing of a real estate transaction (i.e., purchase or sale of a home), which we refer to as gross commission income. We then pay commissions to real estate agents, which are recognized concurrently with associated revenues. We also operate a large independent residential REO asset manager. These REO operations facilitate the maintenance and sale of foreclosed homes on behalf of lenders. |
| |
• | Relocation Services (known as Cartus) - primarily offers clients employee relocation services such as homesale assistance, providing home equity advances to transferees (generally guaranteed by the client), home finding and other destination services, expense processing, relocation policy counseling and consulting services, arranging |
household goods moving services, visa and immigration support, intercultural and language training and group move management services. We provide these relocation services to corporate and government clients for the transfer of their employees. We earn revenues from fees charged to clients for the performance and/or facilitation of these services and recognize such revenue as services are provided. In the majority of relocation transactions, the gain or loss on the sale of a transferee’s home is generally borne by the client. For all homesale transactions, the value paid to the transferee is either the value per the underlying third party buyer contract with the transferee, which results in no gain or loss, or the appraised value as determined by independent appraisers. We generally earn interest income on the funds we advance on behalf of the transferring employee, which is typically based on prime rate or LIBOR rate and recorded within other revenue (as is the corresponding interest expense on the securitization borrowings) in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Additionally, we earn revenue from real estate brokers and other third-party service providers. We recognize such fees from real estate brokers at the time the underlying property closes. For services where we pay a third-party provider on behalf of our clients, we generally earn a referral fee or commission, which is recognized at the time of completion of services.
| |
• | Title and Settlement Services (known as Title Resource Group or TRG) - provides full-service title, settlement and vendor management services to real estate companies, affinity groups, corporations and financial institutions with many of these services provided in connection with the Company’s real estate brokerage and relocation services business. We provide title and closing services, which include title search procedures for title insurance policies, homesale escrow and other closing services. Title revenues, which are recorded net of amounts remitted to third party insurance underwriters, and title and closing service fees are recorded at the time a homesale transaction or refinancing closes. We provide many of these services to third party clients in connection with transactions generated by our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage and Relocation Services segments as well as various financial institutions in the mortgage lending industry. We also serve as an underwriter of title insurance policies in connection with residential and commercial real estate transactions. |
As discussed under the heading “Current Industry Trends,” the domestic residential real estate market has been in a significant and lengthy downturn. As a result, our results of operations have been, and may continue to be, materially adversely affected.
July 2006 Separation from Cendant
Realogy was incorporated on January 27, 2006 to facilitate a plan by Cendant to separate into four independent companies—one for each of Cendant’s real estate services, travel distribution services (“Travelport”), hospitality services (including timeshare resorts) (“Wyndham Worldwide”) and vehicle rental businesses (“Avis Budget Group”). Prior to July 31, 2006, the assets of the real estate services businesses of Cendant were transferred to Realogy and, on July 31, 2006, Cendant distributed all of the shares of Realogy’s common stock held by it to the holders of Cendant common stock issued and outstanding on the record date for the distribution, which was July 21, 2006 (the “Separation”). The Separation was effective on July 31, 2006.
Before the Separation, Realogy entered into a Separation and Distribution Agreement, a Tax Sharing Agreement and several other agreements with Cendant and Cendant’s other businesses to effect the separation and distribution and provide a framework for Realogy’s relationships with Cendant and Cendant’s other businesses after the Separation. These agreements govern the relationships among Realogy, Cendant, Wyndham Worldwide and Travelport subsequent to the completion of the separation plan and provide for the allocation among Realogy, Cendant, Wyndham Worldwide and Travelport of Cendant’s assets, liabilities and obligations attributable to periods prior to the Separation.
April 2007 Merger Agreement with Affiliates of Apollo
On December 15, 2006, Realogy entered into an agreement and plan of merger with Holdings and Domus Acquisition Corp., which are affiliates of Apollo Management VI, L.P., an entity affiliated with Apollo Global Management, LLC. Under the merger agreement, Holdings acquired the outstanding shares of Realogy pursuant to the merger of Domus Acquisition Corp. with and into Realogy, with Realogy being the surviving entity (the “Merger”). The Merger was consummated on April 10, 2007. All of Realogy’s issued and outstanding common stock is currently owned by Intermediate, which is a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of Holdings.
Realogy incurred substantial indebtedness in connection with the Merger, the aggregate proceeds of which were sufficient to pay the aggregate merger consideration, repay a portion of Realogy’s then outstanding indebtedness and pay fees and expenses related to the Merger. Specifically, Realogy entered into the senior secured credit facility, issued unsecured notes and refinanced the credit facilities governing Realogy’s relocation securitization programs. In addition,
investment funds affiliated with, or co-investment vehicles managed by, Apollo Management VI, L.P. or one of its affiliates (together with Apollo Global Management, LLC and its subsidiaries, “Apollo”), as well as members of management who purchased Holdings common stock with cash or through rollover equity, contributed $2,001 million to Realogy to complete the Merger Transactions, which was treated as a contribution to Realogy’s equity. Holdings common stock is currently owned or controlled solely by Apollo, although other parties own Convertible Notes that may be converted, at the option of such parties, into Holdings common stock.
Current Industry Trends
Our businesses compete primarily in the domestic residential real estate market. This market is cyclical in nature and although it has shown strong growth over several decades, it has been in a significant and prolonged downturn, which initially began in the second half of 2005. Based upon data published by NAR from 2005 to 2011, the number of annual U.S. existing homesale units has declined by 40% and the median price has declined by 24%.
In response to the housing downturn, the U.S. government implemented certain actions during the past several years to help stabilize and assist in a recovery of the residential real estate market. These measures have included: (1) the placement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in conservatorship in September 2008 and the funding by the government of billions of dollars to these entities to backstop shortfalls in their capital requirements; (2) the establishment, and subsequent expansion and extension, of a federal homebuyer tax credit for qualified buyers (that, as extended, required signed contracts on or before April 30, 2010); (3) as part of a broader plan to bring stability to credit markets and stimulate the housing market, the purchase of mortgage-backed securities by the Federal Reserve in an attempt to maintain low mortgage rates which concluded in mid-2011; (4) the continuation of the 2008 higher loan limits for the FHA, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae loans most recently extended to the end of 2013; and (5) the availability of low-cost refinancing through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to certain homeowners negatively impacted by falling home prices and encouraging lenders to modify loan terms, including reductions in principal amount, with borrowers at risk of foreclosure or already in foreclosure. Based in part on these measures, since 2010, the residential real estate market has shown signs of stabilization, particularly with respect to the number of homesale transactions, through pressure continues to exist on average homesale price in part due to the high levels of distressed sales.
Interest rates continue to be at low levels by historical standards, which we believe has helped stimulate demand in the residential real estate market, thereby reducing the rate of sales volume decline. According to Freddie Mac, interest rates on commitments for 30-year, fixed-rate first mortgages have decreased from 5.3% in December 2008 to 4.0% in December 2011. Offsetting some of the favorable impact of lower interest rates are conservative mortgage underwriting standards, increased down payment requirements and homeowners having limited or negative equity in homes in certain markets. Mortgage credit conditions have tightened significantly during this housing downturn, with banks limiting credit availability to more creditworthy borrowers and requiring larger down payments, stricter appraisal standards, and more extensive mortgage documentation. As a result, mortgages are less available to borrowers and it frequently takes longer to close a homesale transaction due to the enhanced mortgage and underwriting requirements.
According to Corelogic’s February 2012 press release, there were 1.4 million homes at the end of 2011 in some stage of foreclosure in the U.S. This magnitude of so-called shadow inventory could, were it to be released into the market, adversely impact home prices in local markets, while potentially increasing unit sales activity. Furthermore, according to Corelogic’s November 2011 press release, there are approximately 10.7 million homes that have negative equity, as the mortgages on such properties exceed the estimated fair market value of the homes. Utilizing 2010 Census data, the 10.7 million homes with negative equity represent approximately 14% of all owner-occupied homes in the U.S. More than half of the homes with negative equity are located in just six states (AZ, CA, FL, GA, OH and IL) and, as a result, sales activity in these states could experience a slower pace of sales compared to the rest of the country, as homeowners may be reluctant to sell their residences at a loss.
According to NAR, the inventory of existing homes for sale is 2.3 million homes at December 2011 compared to 3.0 million homes at December 2010. The December 2011 inventory level represents a seasonally adjusted 6.4 months supply which is down from 8.5 months supply as of December 2010. The supply could increase due to the release of homes for sale by financial institutions. This factor could add downward pressure on the price of existing homesales.
Recent Legislative and Regulatory Matters
Dodd-Frank Act. On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law for the express purpose of regulating the financial services industry. The Dodd-Frank Act establishes an independent federal bureau of consumer financial protection to enforce laws involving consumer financial products and services, including mortgage finance. The bureau is empowered
with examination and enforcement authority. The Dodd-Frank Act also establishes new standards and practices for mortgage originators, including determining a prospective borrower’s ability to repay their mortgage, removing incentives for higher cost mortgages, prohibiting prepayment penalties for non-qualified mortgages, prohibiting mandatory arbitration clauses, requiring additional disclosures to potential borrowers and restricting the fees that mortgage originators may collect. While we are continuing to evaluate all aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act, such legislation and regulations promulgated pursuant to such legislation as well as other legislation that may be enacted to reform the U.S. housing finance market could materially and adversely affect the mortgage and housing industries, result in heightened federal regulation and oversight of the mortgage and housing industries, disrupt mortgage availability, increase down payment requirements, increase mortgage costs and result in potential litigation for housing market participants.
Certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the operation and practices of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other government sponsored entities, or GSEs, and require sponsors of securitizations to retain a portion of the economic interest in the credit risk associated with the assets securitized by them. Substantial reduction in, or the elimination of, GSE demand for mortgage loans by reducing qualifying mortgages could have a material adverse effect on the mortgage industry and the housing industry in general and these provisions may reduce the availability or increase the cost of mortgages to certain individuals.
Potential Reform of the U.S. Housing Finance Market and Potential Wind-down of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. On February 11, 2011, the Obama Administration issued a report to the U.S. Congress outlining proposals to reform the U.S. housing finance market, including, among other things, reform designed to reduce government support for housing finance and the winding down of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae over a period of years. Numerous pieces of legislation seeking various types of reform for the GSEs have been introduced in Congress. Legislation, if enacted, which curtails Freddie Mac and/or Fannie Mae’s activities and/or results in the wind down of these entities could increase mortgage costs and could result in more stringent underwriting guidelines imposed by lenders, either of which could have a materially adverse affect on the housing market in general and our operations in particular. Given the current uncertainty with respect to the extent, if any, of such reform, it is difficult to predict either the long-term or short-term impact of government action that may be taken. At present, the U.S. government also is attempting, through various avenues, to increase loan modifications for home owners with negative equity.
Mortgage Interest Deduction. Certain lawmakers are looking into a variety of tax law changes in order to achieve additional tax revenues and reduce the federal deficit. One possible change would reduce the amount certain taxpayers would be allowed to deduct for home mortgage interest and possibly limit the deduction to one’s primary residence. Any reduction in the mortgage interest deduction could have an adverse effect on the housing market by reducing incentives for buying homes and could negatively affect property values.
***
We believe that long-term demand for housing and the growth of our industry is primarily driven by affordability, the economic health of the domestic economy, positive demographic trends such as population growth, increases in the number of U.S. households, low interest rates, increases in renters that qualify as homebuyers and locally based dynamics such as housing demand relative to housing supply. While the housing market has shown signs of stabilization, there remains substantial uncertainty with respect to the timing and scope of a housing recovery. Factors that may negatively affect a housing recovery include:
| |
• | higher mortgage rates as well as reduced availability of mortgage financing; |
| |
• | lower unit sales, due to the reluctance of first time homebuyers to purchase due to concerns about investing in a home and move-up buyers having limited or negative equity in homes; |
| |
• | lower average homesale price, particularly if banks and other mortgage servicers liquidate foreclosed properties that they are currently holding in certain concentrated affected markets; |
| |
• | continuing high levels of unemployment and associated lack of consumer confidence; |
| |
• | unsustainable economic recovery in the U.S. or a weak recovery resulting in only modest economic growth; |
| |
• | a lack of stability or improvement in home ownership levels in the U.S.; and |
| |
• | legislative or regulatory reform, including but not limited to reform that adversely impacts the financing of the U.S. housing market or amends the Internal Revenue Code in a manner that negatively impacts home ownership such as reform that reduces the amount that certain taxpayers would be allowed to deduct for home mortgage interest. |
Consequently, we cannot predict when the residential real estate industry will return to a period of sustainable growth. Moreover, if the residential real estate market or the economy as a whole does not improve, we may experience further adverse effects on our business, financial condition and liquidity, including our ability to access capital.
Many of the trends impacting our businesses that derive revenue from homesales also impact our Relocation Services business, which is a global provider of outsourced employee relocation services. In addition to general residential housing trends, key drivers of our Relocation Services business are corporate spending and employment trends which have shown signs of stabilization; however, there can be no assurance that corporate spending on relocation services will return to previous levels following any economic recovery.
Homesales
According to NAR, homesale transactions for 2011 increased 2% over 2010 and represent the 4th consecutive year that homesale transactions have been in the 4.1 to 4.3 million range on an annual basis, despite adverse economic and housing conditions during that period. The annual year over year trend in homesale transactions is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | |
| 2011 vs. 2010 | | 2010 vs. 2009 | | 2009 vs. 2008 |
Number of Homesales | | | | | |
Industry | | | | | |
NAR | 2% (a) |
| | (5 | )% | | 5 | % |
Fannie Mae | 2% (a) |
| | (5 | )% | | 5 | % |
Realogy | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services | (1 | )% | | (6 | )% | | (1 | )% |
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | — | % | | (7 | )% | | — | % |
_______________
| |
(a) | Existing homesale data is as of the most recent NAR and Fannie Mae press release. |
As of their most recent releases, NAR and Fannie Mae are forecasting an increase of 7% and 6%, respectively, in existing homesale transactions for 2012 compared to 2011. In addition, NAR and Fannie Mae are forecasting an increase of 3% and 3%, respectively, in existing homesale transactions for 2013 compared to 2012.
Homesale Price
In 2010, the percentage decrease in the average price of homes brokered by our franchisees and company owned offices significantly outperformed the percentage change in median home price reported by NAR, due to the geographic areas they serve, as well as, a greater impact from increased activity in the mid and higher price point segment of the housing market and less distressed homesale activity in our company owned offices compared to the prior year. NAR reported homesale price declines of 4% for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 2010 while our price was flat for RFG and only down 2% for NRT. We believe that one significant reason, other than our geographic footprint, that accounts for the difference between our average homesale price and the median homesale price of NAR is due to the high level of distressed sales included in NAR’s data. The annual year over year trend in the price of homes is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | |
| 2011 vs. 2010 | | 2010 vs. 2009 | | 2009 vs. 2008 |
Price of Homes | | | | | |
Industry | | | | | |
NAR | (4)%(a) |
| | — | % | | (13 | )% |
Fannie Mae | (4)%(a) |
| | — | % | | (13 | )% |
Realogy | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services | — | % | | 4 | % | | (11 | )% |
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | (2 | )% | | 11 | % | | (18 | )% |
_______________
| |
(a) | Existing homesale price data is for median price and is as of the most recent NAR and Fannie Mae press release. |
As of their most recent releases, NAR is forecasting an increase of 1% in median homesale prices for 2012 compared to 2011, while Fannie Mae is forecasting a decrease of 3% in median homesale prices for 2012 compared to 2011. In addition, NAR is forecasting an increase of 2% in median homesale prices for 2013 compared to 2012 and Fannie Mae is forecasting that median homesale prices are flat.
***
While data provided by NAR and Fannie Mae are two indicators of the direction of the residential housing market, we believe that homesale statistics will continue to vary between us and NAR and Fannie Mae because they use survey data in their historical reports and forecasting models whereas we use data based on actual reported results. In addition to the differences in calculation methodologies, there are geographical differences and concentrations in the markets in which we operate versus the national market. For instance, comparability is impaired due to NAR’s utilization of seasonally adjusted annualized rates whereas we report actual period over period changes and their use of median price for their forecasts compared to our average price. Additionally, NAR data is subject to periodic review and revision. On December 21, 2011, NAR issued a press release disclosing that it had completed a review of its sampling and methodology processes with respect to existing homesales and as a result has issued a downward revision to their previously reported homesales and inventory data for the period from 2007 through November 2011. For example, NAR previously estimated that homesale transactions for 2010 were 4.9 million, but, after the revision NAR estimated that homesale transactions for 2010 were 4.2 million. The revision did not affect NAR’s previously reported median or average price data. These revisions had no impact on our reported financial results or key business driver information. While we believe that the industry data presented herein are derived from the most widely recognized sources for reporting U.S. residential housing market statistical data, we do not endorse or suggest reliance on this data alone. We also note that forecasts are inherently uncertain or speculative in nature and actual results for any period may materially differ.
Housing Affordability Index
According to NAR, the housing affordability index has continued to improve as a result of the homesale price declines that began in 2007. An index above 100 signifies that a family earning the median income has more than enough income to qualify for a mortgage loan on a median-priced home, assuming a 20 percent down payment. The housing affordability index improved to 185 for 2011 compared to 174 for 2010 and 169 for 2009 and the overall improvement in this index could favorably impact a housing recovery.
Other Factors
Due to the prolonged downturn in the residential real estate market, a significant number of franchisees have experienced operating difficulties. As a result, many of our franchisees with multiple offices have reduced overhead and consolidated offices in an attempt to remain competitive in the marketplace. In addition, we have had to terminate franchisees due to non-reporting and non-payment which could adversely impact transaction volumes in the future. Due to the factors noted above, we significantly increased our bad debt and note reserves in prior years and continue to actively monitor the collectability of receivables and notes from our franchisees. In response to the weakness in the residential real estate market, our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment has consolidated the number of offices it operates from 1,082 offices at December 31, 2005 to 725 offices at December 31, 2011.
Key Drivers of Our Businesses
Within our Real Estate Franchise Services segment and our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment, we measure operating performance using the following key operating statistics: (i) closed homesale sides, which represents either the “buy” side or the “sell” side of a homesale transaction, (ii) average homesale price, which represents the average selling price of closed homesale transactions and (iii) average homesale broker commission rate, which represents the average commission rate earned on either the “buy” side or “sell” side of a homesale transaction. Our Real Estate Franchise Services segment is also impacted by the net effective royalty rate which represents the average percentage of our franchisees’ commission revenues payable to our Real Estate Franchise Services segment, net of volume incentives achieved. The net effective royalty rate does not include the effect of non-standard incentives granted to some franchisees.
Prior to 2006, the average homesale broker commission rate was declining several basis points per year, the effect of which was more than offset by increases in homesale prices. From 2007 through 2011, the average broker commission rate remained fairly stable; however, we expect that, over the long term, the average brokerage commission rates will modestly decline.
The net effective royalty rate has been declining over the past three years. We would expect that, over the near term, the net effective royalty rate will continue to modestly decline due to an increased concentration of business in larger franchisees which earn higher volume rebates as well as the Company’s focus on strategic growth through relationships with larger established real estate companies which may pay a lower royalty rate. The net effective rate can also be affected by a shift in volume amongst our brands which operate under different royalty rate arrangements.
Our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment has a significant concentration of real estate brokerage offices and transactions in geographic regions where home prices are at the higher end of the U.S. real estate market, particularly the east and west coasts, while our Real Estate Franchise Services segment has franchised offices that are more widely dispersed across the United States. Accordingly, operating results and homesale statistics may differ between our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment and our Real Estate Franchise Services segment based upon geographic presence and the corresponding homesale activity in each geographic region.
Within our Relocation Services segment, we measure operating performance using the following key operating statistics: (i) initiations, which represent the total number of transferees we serve and (ii) referrals, which represent the number of referrals from which we earn revenue from real estate brokers. In our Title and Settlement Services segment, operating performance is evaluated using the following key metrics: (i) purchase title and closing units, which represent the number of title and closing units we process as a result of home purchases, (ii) refinance title and closing units, which represent the number of title and closing units we process as a result of homeowners refinancing their home loans, and (iii) average price per closing unit, which represents the average fee we earn on purchase title and refinancing title sides.
The decline in the number of homesale transactions and the decline in homesale prices has and could continue to adversely affect our results of operations by: (i) reducing the royalties we receive from our franchisees and company owned brokerages, (ii) reducing the commissions our company owned brokerage operations earn, (iii) reducing the demand for our title and settlement services, (iv) reducing the referral fees we earn in our relocation services business, and (v) increasing the risk of franchisee default due to lower homesale volume. Our results could also be negatively affected by a decline in commission rates charged by brokers.
The following table presents our drivers for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009. See “Results of Operations” below for a discussion as to how the material drivers affected our business for the periods presented.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | % Change | | 2010 | | 2009 | | % Change |
Real Estate Franchise Services (a) | | | | | | | | | | | |
Closed homesale sides | 909,610 |
| | 922,341 |
| | (1 | %) | | 922,341 |
| | 983,516 |
| | (6 | %) |
Average homesale price | $ | 198,268 |
| | $ | 198,076 |
| | — | % | | $ | 198,076 |
| | $ | 190,406 |
| | 4 | % |
Average homesale broker commission rate | 2.55 | % | | 2.54 | % | | 1 bps |
| | 2.54 | % | | 2.55 | % | | (1) bps |
|
Net effective royalty rate | 4.84 | % | | 5.00 | % | | (16) bps |
| | 5.00 | % | | 5.10 | % | | (10) bps |
|
Royalty per side | $ | 256 |
| | $ | 262 |
| | (2 | %) | | $ | 262 |
| | $ | 257 |
| | 2 | % |
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | | | | | | | | | | | |
Closed homesale sides | 254,522 |
| | 255,287 |
| | —% | | 255,287 |
| | 273,817 |
| | (7 | %) |
Average homesale price | $ | 426,402 |
| | $ | 435,500 |
| | (2 | %) | | $ | 435,500 |
| | $ | 390,688 |
| | 11 | % |
Average homesale broker commission rate | 2.50 | % | | 2.48 | % | | 2 bps |
| | 2.48 | % | | 2.51 | % | | (3) bps |
|
Gross commission income per side | $ | 11,461 |
| | $ | 11,571 |
| | (1 | %) | | $ | 11,571 |
| | $ | 10,519 |
| | 10 | % |
Relocation Services | | | | | | | | | | | |
Initiations (b) | 153,269 |
| | 148,304 |
| | 3 | % | | 148,304 |
| | 114,684 |
| | 29 | % |
Referrals (c) | 72,169 |
| | 69,605 |
| | 4 | % | | 69,605 |
| | 64,995 |
| | 7 | % |
Title and Settlement Services | | | | | | | | | | | |
Purchase title and closing units | 93,245 |
| | 94,290 |
| | (1 | %) | | 94,290 |
| | 104,689 |
| | (10 | %) |
Refinance title and closing units | 62,850 |
| | 62,225 |
| | 1 | % | | 62,225 |
| | 69,927 |
| | (11 | %) |
Average price per closing unit | $ | 1,409 |
| | $ | 1,386 |
| | 2 | % | | $ | 1,386 |
| | $ | 1,317 |
| | 5 | % |
_______________ | |
(a) | Includes all franchisees except for our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment. |
| |
(b) | Includes initiations of 26,087 for the year ended December 31, 2010, related to the Primacy acquisition in January 2010. |
| |
(c) | Includes referrals of 4,997 for the year ended December 31, 2010, related to the Primacy acquisition in January 2010. |
The following table represents the impact of our revenue drivers on our business operations.
The following table sets forth the impact on EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2011 assuming either our homesale sides or average selling price of closed homesale transactions, with all else being equal, increased or decreased by 1%, 3% and 5%.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Homesale Sides/Average Price (1) | | Decline of | | Increase of |
| | 5% | | 3% | | 1% | | 1% | | 3% | | 5% |
| (units and price in thousands) | | ($ in millions) |
Homesale sides change impact on: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services (2) | 910 sides | | $ | (12 | ) | | $ | (7 | ) | | $ | (2 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 7 |
| | $ | 12 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services (3) | 255 sides | | $ | (43 | ) | | $ | (26 | ) | | $ | (9 | ) | | $ | 9 |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 43 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Homesale average price change impact on: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services (2) | $198 | | $ | (12 | ) | | $ | (7 | ) | | $ | (2 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 7 |
| | $ | 12 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services (3) | $426 | | $ | (43 | ) | | $ | (26 | ) | | $ | (9 | ) | | $ | 9 |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 43 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | Average price represents the average selling price of closed homesale transactions. |
| |
(2) | Increase/(decrease) relates to impact on non-company owned real estate brokerage operations only. |
| |
(3) | Increase/(decrease) represents impact on company owned real estate brokerage operations and related intercompany royalties to our real estate franchise services operations. |
Results of Operations
Discussed below are our consolidated results of operations and the results of operations for each of our reportable segments. The reportable segments presented below represent our operating segments for which separate financial information is available and which is utilized on a regular basis by our chief operating decision maker to assess performance and to allocate resources. In identifying our reportable segments, we also consider the nature of services provided by our operating segments. Management evaluates the operating results of each of our reportable segments based upon revenue and EBITDA. EBITDA is defined as net income (loss) before depreciation and amortization, interest (income) expense, net (other than Relocation Services interest for securitization assets and securitization obligations) and income taxes, each of which is presented on our Consolidated Statements of Operations. Our presentation of EBITDA may not be comparable to similarly-titled measures used by other companies.
Year Ended December 31, 2011 vs. Year Ended December 31, 2010
Our consolidated results were comprised of the following:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | Change |
Net revenues | $ | 4,093 |
| | $ | 4,090 |
| | $ | 3 |
|
Total expenses (1) | 4,526 |
| | 4,084 |
| | 442 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests | (433 | ) | | 6 |
| | (439 | ) |
Income tax expense (benefit) | 32 |
| | 133 |
| | (101 | ) |
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated entities | (26 | ) | | (30 | ) | | 4 |
|
Net loss | (439 | ) | | (97 | ) | | (342 | ) |
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) | | — |
|
Net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (342 | ) |
_______________
| |
(1) | Total expenses for the year ended December 31, 2011 include $11 million of restructuring costs, $1 million of merger costs and $60 million related to the 2011 Refinancing Transactions (as defined below), partially offset by a net benefit of $15 million of former parent legacy items. Total expenses for the year ended December 31, 2010 include $21 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs, offset by a net benefit of $323 million of former parent legacy items primarily as a result of tax and other liability adjustments. |
Net revenues increased $3 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared with the year ended December 31, 2010 principally due to an increase in revenues for the Title and Settlement Services segment due to higher refinance and title insurance premiums and the Relocation Services segment due to volume increases. These increases were offset by decreases in homesale transaction volume at the Real Estate Franchise Services segment and Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment as a result of the absence of the homebuyer tax credit in 2011.
Total expenses increased $442 million (11%) primarily due to:
| |
• | the absence of a net benefit of $323 million of parent legacy items as a result of tax and other liability adjustments which occurred in 2010 compared to a net benefit of $15 million of former parent legacy items in 2011; |
| |
• | the impact of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions, which resulted in a $36 million loss on the early extinguishment of debt as well as an increase in interest expense of $17 million as a result of the de-designation of interest rate swaps and $7 million due to the write-off of financing costs; and |
| |
• | a $51 million increase in operating, marketing and general and administrative expenses primarily due to: |
| |
◦ | an increase in variable operating expenses for the Title and Settlement Services segment of $25 million as a result of increases in underwriter and refinancing volume and $3 million increase in legal expenses; |
| |
◦ | an increase in expenses for the Real Estate Franchise Service segment, primarily due to $10 million of incremental legal expenses, $7 million of incremental employee related costs, $5 million of incremental expenses related to the international business conferences for all of our brands in 2011 that were not held in 2010 and a $4 million increase in marketing expenses; |
| |
◦ | an increase in variable operating expenses for the Relocation Services segment of $11 million primarily as a result of increases in international volume and $5 million of incremental employee related costs; and |
| |
◦ | partially offset by a decrease of $30 million in operating expenses at the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment due to restructuring and cost-saving activities as well as reduced employee related costs. |
Our income tax expense for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $32 million and was comprised of the following:
| |
• | $19 million of income tax expense which was primarily due to an increase in deferred tax liabilities associated with indefinite-lived intangible assets, and |
| |
• | $13 million of income tax expense for foreign and state income taxes in certain jurisdictions. |
No Federal income tax benefit was recognized for the current period due to the recognition of a full valuation allowance for domestic operations.
Following is a more detailed discussion of the results of each of our reportable segments for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Revenues (a) | | | | EBITDA (b)(c) | | | | Margin | | |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | % Change | | 2011 | | 2010 | | % Change | | 2011 | | 2010 | | Change |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 557 |
| | $ | 560 |
| | (1 | )% | | $ | 320 |
| | $ | 352 |
| | (9 | )% | | 57 | % | | 63 | % | | (6 | ) |
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 2,970 |
| | 3,016 |
| | (2 | ) | | 56 |
| | 80 |
| | (30 | ) | | 2 |
| | 3 |
| | (1 | ) |
Relocation Services | 423 |
| | 405 |
| | 4 |
| | 115 |
| | 109 |
| | 6 |
| | 27 |
| | 27 |
| | — |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 359 |
| | 325 |
| | 10 |
| | 29 |
| | 25 |
| | 16 |
| | 8 |
| | 8 |
| | — |
|
Corporate and Other | (216 | ) | | (216 | ) | | * |
| | (77 | ) | | 269 |
| | * |
| | | | | | |
Total Company | $ | 4,093 |
| | $ | 4,090 |
| | — | % | | $ | 443 |
| | $ | 835 |
| | (47 | )% | | 11 | % | | 20 | % | | (9 | ) |
Less: Depreciation and amortization | | | | | | | 186 |
| | 197 |
| | | | | | | | |
Interest expense, net (d) | | | | | | | 666 |
| | 604 |
| | | | | | | | |
Income tax expense (benefit) | | | | | | | 32 |
| | 133 |
| | | | | | | | |
Net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy | | | | | | | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | (99 | ) | | | | | | | | |
_______________
| |
(a) | Revenues include elimination of transactions between segments, which primarily consists of intercompany royalties and marketing fees paid by our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment of $216 million and $216 million during the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. |
| |
(b) | EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2011 includes $11 million of restructuring costs, $1 million of merger costs and $36 million loss on the early extinguishment of debt, partially offset by a net benefit of $15 million of former parent legacy items. |
| |
(c) | EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2010 includes $21 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs, offset by a net benefit of $323 million of former parent legacy items primarily as a result of tax and other liability adjustments. |
| |
(d) | Includes $24 million of incremental interest expense in 2011 which is comprised of $17 million due to the de-designation of interest rate swaps from an accounting perspective and $7 million due to the write-off of financing costs as a result of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions. |
As described in the aforementioned table, EBITDA margin for “Total Company” expressed as a percentage of revenues decreased 9 percentage points for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010 primarily due to a net benefit of $323 million of former parent legacy items resulting from tax and other liability adjustments in 2010 compared to a net benefit of $15 million of former parent legacy items for 2011. In addition, there was a decrease in current year EBITDA due to a $36 million loss on the early extinguishment of debt as well as a decrease in homesale transaction volume at the Real Estate Franchise Services segment and Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment as well as increased expenses at the Real Estate Franchise Services segment.
On a segment basis, the Real Estate Franchise Services segment margin decreased 6 percentage points to 57% from 63% in the comparable prior period due to an increase in legal expenses, employee related expenses, incremental expenses related to the international business conferences and other expenses. The Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services
segment margin decreased 1 percentage point to 2% from 3% in the comparable prior period due to a slight decrease in the number of homesale transactions and a decrease in equity earnings related to our investment in PHH Home Loans, partially offset by lower operating expenses primarily as a result of restructuring and cost-saving activities. The Relocation Services segment margin remained at 27% and the Title and Settlement Services segment margin remained at 8%.
Corporate and Other EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2011 decreased $346 million to negative $77 million primarily due to a net benefit of $323 million in 2010 of former parent legacy items resulting from tax and other liability adjustments compared to a net benefit of $15 million in 2011 from former parent legacy items for the same comparable period and a $36 million loss on the early extinguishment of debt as a result of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions.
Real Estate Franchise Services
Revenues decreased $3 million to $557 million and EBITDA decreased $32 million to $320 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared with the same period in 2010.
The decrease in revenue was driven by a $10 million decrease in third-party domestic franchisee royalty revenue due to a 1% decrease in the number of homesale transactions and a lower net effective royalty rate as our larger affiliates are achieving higher volume levels. Average homesale price remained flat compared to 2010.
The decrease in revenue was also attributable to a $2 million decrease in royalties received from our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment which pays royalties to our Real Estate Franchise Services segment. These intercompany royalties of $204 million and $206 million during 2011 and 2010, respectively, are eliminated in consolidation. See “Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services” for a discussion of the drivers related to this period over period revenue decrease for Real Estate Franchise Services segment.
These decreases were partially offset by a $7 million increase in marketing revenue compared to the same period in 2010 and a $3 million increase in area development fees.
The decrease in EBITDA was due to the decrease in revenues discussed above, as well as:
| |
• | a $10 million increase in legal expenses primarily due to higher legal costs and legal reserves and the reversal of litigation accruals in 2010 due to a favorable legal outcome and an insurance reimbursement; |
| |
• | an increase in employee related costs of $7 million; |
| |
• | incremental expenses of $5 million related to the international business conferences for all of our brands in 2011; |
| |
• | an increase in marketing expense of $4 million; and |
| |
• | a $2 million impairment of a cost method investment. |
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services
Revenues decreased $46 million to $2,970 million and EBITDA decreased $24 million to $56 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared with the same period in 2010.
Excluding REO revenues, revenues decreased $33 million primarily due to decreased commission income earned on homesale transactions. This decrease was driven by a 2% decrease in the average price of homes sold while the number of homesale transactions remained flat and an increase in the average broker commission rate. We believe the 2% decrease in the average price of homes sold and flat homesale transactions are reflective of industry trends in the markets we serve. Separately, revenues from our REO asset management company decreased by $13 million to $23 million in the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010 due to reduced inventory levels of foreclosed properties being made available for sale. Our REO operations facilitate the maintenance and sale of foreclosed homes on behalf of lenders.
EBITDA decreased $24 million due to the decrease in revenues discussed above, as well as:
| |
• | $14 million related to additional operating costs related to late 2010 acquisitions; and |
| |
• | a $4 million decrease in equity earnings related to our investment in PHH Home Loans; |
partially offset by,
| |
• | a $44 million decrease in operating expenses, net of inflation, due to restructuring and cost-saving activities as well as reduced employee costs; and |
| |
• | a $2 million decrease in royalties paid to our Real Estate Franchise Services segment. |
Relocation Services
Revenues increased $18 million to $423 million and EBITDA increased $6 million to $115 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared with the same period in 2010.
The increase in revenues was primarily driven by $19 million of incremental international revenue due to increased transaction volume and a $4 million increase in relocation service fee revenues primarily due to higher domestic transaction volume. These increases were partially offset by a $5 million decrease in at-risk revenue due to fewer closings in 2011 compared to 2010.
EBITDA increased $6 million primarily as a result of the increase in revenues discussed above and a $3 million decrease in restructuring expenses, partially offset by an $8 million increase in operating expenses due to higher volume related international costs and an $8 million increase due to higher employee related costs.
Title and Settlement Services
Revenues increased $34 million to $359 million and EBITDA increased $4 million to $29 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared with the same period in 2010.
The increase in revenues was primarily driven by a $32 million increase in underwriter revenue and a $2 million increase in volume from refinancing transactions. EBITDA increased $4 million as a result of the increase in revenues discussed above partially offset by an increase of $25 million in variable operating costs as a result of the increase in underwriter and refinancing volume noted above and $3 million increase in legal expenses.
2011 Restructuring Program
During 2011, the Company committed to various initiatives targeted principally at reducing costs, enhancing organizational efficiencies and consolidating existing facilities. The Company incurred restructuring charges of $11 million in 2011. The Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment recognized $5 million of facility related expenses and $4 million of personnel related expenses. The Relocation Services and Title and Settlement Services segments each recognized $1 million of facility and personnel related expenses. At December 31, 2011, the remaining liability was $3 million.
2010 Restructuring Program
During 2010, the Company committed to various initiatives targeted principally at reducing costs, enhancing organizational efficiencies and consolidating facilities. The Company recognized $21 million for the year ended December 31, 2010. The Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment recognized $9 million of facility related expenses, $3 million of personnel related expenses and $1 million of expense related to asset impairments. The Relocation Services segment recognized $2 million of facility related expenses and $1 million of personnel related expenses. The Title and Settlement Services segment recognized $2 million of facility related expenses and $1 million of personnel related expenses. The Corporate and Other segment recognized $2 million of facility related expenses. At December 31, 2011, the remaining liability was $3 million.
Year Ended December 31, 2010 vs. Year Ended December 31, 2009
Our consolidated results were comprised of the following:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, |
| 2010 | | 2009 | | Change |
Net revenues | $ | 4,090 |
| | $ | 3,932 |
| | $ | 158 |
|
Total expenses (1) | 4,084 |
| | 4,266 |
| | (182 | ) |
Income (loss) before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests | 6 |
| | (334 | ) | | 340 |
|
Income tax benefit | 133 |
| | (50 | ) | | 183 |
|
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated entities | (30 | ) | | (24 | ) | | (6 | ) |
Net loss | (97 | ) | | (260 | ) | | 163 |
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) | | — |
|
Net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (262 | ) | | $ | 163 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | Total expenses for the year ended December 31, 2010 include $21 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs, offset by a net benefit of $323 million of former parent legacy items primarily as a result of tax and other liability adjustments. Total expenses for the year ended December 31, 2009 include $70 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs offset by a benefit of $34 million of former parent legacy items (comprised of a benefit of $55 million recorded at Cartus related to Wright Express Corporation (”WEX”) partially offset by $21 million of expenses recorded at Corporate) and a gain on the extinguishment of debt of $75 million. |
Net revenues increased $158 million (4%) for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared with the year ended December 31, 2009 principally due to an increase in the average price of homes sold and the impact of the Primacy acquisition.
Total expenses decreased $182 million (4%) primarily due to a net benefit of $323 million of former parent legacy items primarily as a result of tax and other liability adjustments compared to a net benefit of $34 million of former parent legacy items during the same period in 2009 which was primarily comprised of $55 million of tax receivable payments from WEX, as well as a decrease in restructuring expenses of $49 million compared to the same period in 2009. The decrease in expenses was partially offset by an $82 million increase in commission expenses paid to real estate agents due to increased gross commission income, the absence of a $75 million gain on the extinguishment of debt included in expenses in 2009, as well as a $21 million increase in interest expense.
Our income tax expense for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $133 million and was comprised of the following:
| |
• | $109 million of income tax expense was recorded for the reduction of certain deferred tax assets as a result of our former parent company’s IRS examination settlement of Cendant’s taxable years 2003 through 2006; |
| |
• | $22 million of income tax expense was recorded for an increase in deferred tax liabilities associated with indefinite-lived intangible assets; and |
| |
• | $2 million of income tax expense was recognized primarily for foreign and state income taxes for certain jurisdictions. |
No Federal income tax benefit was recognized for the current period due to the recognition of a full valuation allowance for domestic operations.
Following is a more detailed discussion of the results of each of our reportable segments for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Revenues (a) | | | | EBITDA (b)(c) | | | | Margin | | |
| 2010 | | 2009 | | % Change | | 2010 | | 2009 | | % Change | | 2010 | | 2009 | | Change |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 560 |
| | $ | 538 |
| | 4 | % | | $ | 352 |
| | $ | 323 |
| | 9 | % | | 63 | % | | 60 | % | | 3 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 3,016 |
| | 2,959 |
| | 2 |
| | 80 |
| | 6 |
| | 1,233 |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 3 |
|
Relocation Services | 405 |
| | 320 |
| | 27 |
| | 109 |
| | 122 |
| | (11 | ) | | 27 |
| | 38 |
| | (11 | ) |
Title and Settlement Services | 325 |
| | 328 |
| | (1 | ) | | 25 |
| | 20 |
| | 25 |
| | 8 |
| | 6 |
| | 2 |
|
Corporate and Other (d) | (216 | ) | | (213 | ) | | * |
| | 269 |
| | (6 | ) | | * |
| | | | | | |
Total Company | $ | 4,090 |
| | $ | 3,932 |
| | 4 | % | | $ | 835 |
| | $ | 465 |
| | 80 | % | | 20 | % | | 12 | % | | 8 |
|
Less: Depreciation and amortization
| | | | | | | $ | 197 |
| | $ | 194 |
| | | | | | | | |
Interest expense, net | | | | | | | $ | 604 |
| | $ | 583 |
| | | | | | | | |
Income tax expense (benefit) | | | | | | | $ | 133 |
| | $ | (50 | ) | | | | | | | | |
Net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy | | | | | | | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (262 | ) | | | | | | | | |
_______________
| |
(a) | Revenues include elimination of transactions between segments, which consists of intercompany royalties and marketing fees paid by our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment of $216 million and $213 million during the year ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. |
| |
(b) | EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2010 includes $21 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs, offset by a net benefit of $323 million of former parent legacy items primarily as a result of tax and other liability adjustments. |
| |
(c) | EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2009 includes $70 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs offset by a benefit of $34 million of former parent legacy items (comprised of a benefit of $55 million recorded at Cartus related to WEX partially offset by $21 million of expenses recorded at Corporate). |
| |
(d) | EBITDA includes unallocated corporate overhead and a gain on the extinguishment of debt of $75 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. |
As described in the aforementioned table, EBITDA margin for “Total Company” expressed as a percentage of revenues increased 8 percentage points for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009 primarily due to a $289 million increase in former parent legacy benefits as well as improvements in operating results from our Real Estate Franchise Services and Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segments.
On a segment basis, the Real Estate Franchise Services segment margin increased 3 percentage points to 63% from 60% in the prior period. The year ended December 31, 2010 reflected a decline in homesale transactions, primarily in the second half of the year, largely offset by higher average homesale prices. In addition, the segment had lower bad debt and notes reserve expense.
The Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment margin increased 3 percentage points to 3% from zero in the comparable prior period. The year ended December 31, 2010 reflected an increase in the average homesale price and lower operating expenses primarily as a result of restructuring and cost-saving activities partially offset by a decrease in the number of homesale transactions. Sales volume for the year ended December 31, 2010 benefited from the homebuyer tax credit in the first half of the year as well as a notable increase in activity at the mid and higher end of the housing market throughout the year.
The Relocation Services segment margin decreased 11 percentage points to 27% from 38% in the comparable prior period primarily due to the absence in 2010 of $55 million of tax receivable payments from WEX in 2009, partially offset by reduced employee costs and other cost saving initiatives.
The Title and Settlement Services segment margin increased 2 percentage points to 8% from 6% in the comparable prior period primarily due to cost reductions which more than offset the slight decrease in revenue.
Corporate and Other EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2010 increased $275 million to $269 million due to a net benefit of $323 million of former parent legacy items primarily as a result of tax and other liability adjustments compared to a net cost of $21 million of former parent legacy items for the same period in 2009. The increase was also due
to the absence in 2010 versus 2009 of a $14 million writedown of a cost method investment. The net increase was partially offset by the absence in 2010 versus 2009 of a $75 million gain on debt extinguishment and $11 million of proceeds from a legal settlement.
Real Estate Franchise Services
Revenues increased $22 million to $560 million and EBITDA increased $29 million to $352 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared with the same period in 2009.
Intercompany royalties from our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment increased $4 million from $202 million in 2009 to $206 million in 2010. These intercompany royalties are eliminated in consolidation through the Corporate and Other segment and therefore have no impact on consolidated revenues and EBITDA, but do affect segment level revenues and EBITDA. See “Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services” for a discussion as to the drivers related to this period over period revenue increase for real estate franchise services.
International revenue increased $4 million during the year ended December 31, 2010, while third-party domestic franchisee royalty revenue decreased $11 million compared to the prior year due to a 6% decrease in the number of homesale transactions partially offset by a 4% increase in the average homesale price. In addition, marketing revenue and related marketing expenses increased $27 million and $22 million, respectively.
The $29 million increase in EBITDA was principally due to the increase in revenues discussed above, a $17 million decrease in bad debt and note reserves expense as a result of improved collection activities compared to the prior period and a $7 million decrease in expenses related to conferences and franchisee events.
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services
Revenues increased $57 million to $3,016 million and EBITDA increased $74 million to $80 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared with the same period in 2009.
Excluding REO revenues, revenues increased $87 million primarily due to increased commission income earned on homesale transactions which was driven by an 11% increase in the average price of homes sold, partially offset by a 7% decrease in the number of homesale transactions and a decrease in the average broker commission rate. The increase in the average homesale price and lower average broker commission rate are primarily the result of a shift in homesale activity from lower to higher price points. We believe the 7% decrease in homesale transactions is reflective of industry trends in the markets we serve and the decrease may have been higher if the housing market was not aided by the 2010 homebuyer tax credit program in the first half of 2010, particularly in locations which have lower average homesale prices. Separately, revenues from our REO asset management company decreased by $30 million to $36 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the same period in 2009 due to generally reduced inventory levels of foreclosed properties being made available for sale. Our REO operations facilitate the maintenance and sale of foreclosed homes on behalf of lenders.
EBITDA increased $74 million due to the $57 million increase in revenues discussed above as well as:
| |
• | a decrease in restructuring expense of $35 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the same period in the prior year; |
| |
• | a decrease of $60 million in other operating expenses, net of inflation, primarily due to restructuring and cost-saving activities as well as reduced employee costs; |
| |
• | an increase of $6 million in equity earnings related to our investment in PHH Home Loans; and |
| |
• | a decrease of $5 million in marketing costs due to cost reduction initiatives; |
partially offset by:
| |
• | an increase of $82 million in commission expenses paid to real estate agents as a result of the increase in revenues earned on homesale transactions; and |
| |
• | an increase of $4 million in royalties paid to our Real Estate Franchise Services segment as a result of the increase in revenues earned on homesale transactions. |
Relocation Services
Revenues increased $85 million to $405 million, including $75 million related to Primacy, and EBITDA decreased $13 million to $109 million, despite an increase of $14 million related to Primacy, for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared with the same period in 2009.
Relocation revenue, excluding the Primacy acquisition, increased $10 million and was primarily driven by a $7 million increase in international revenue due to higher transaction volume. The acquisition of Primacy in January 2010 contributed $75 million of revenue during the year ended December 31, 2010, which primarily consisted of $31 million of referral and domestic relocation service fee revenue, $25 million of government at-risk revenue and $14 million of international revenue.
EBITDA, excluding the Primacy acquisition, decreased $27 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared with the same period in 2009 due to the absence in 2010 of $55 million of tax receivable payments from WEX. Absent the impact of the WEX tax receivable payments and the Primacy results, EBITDA increased $28 million primarily as a result of a $12 million decrease in other operating expenses as a result of reduced employee costs and other cost-saving initiatives, a $9 million decrease in restructuring expenses, and a $4 million year over year reduction in legal expenses. EBITDA, excluding the impact of the WEX tax receivable payments, increased $42 million.
Title and Settlement Services
Revenues decreased $3 million to $325 million and EBITDA increased $5 million to $25 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared with the same period in 2009.
The decrease in revenues was primarily driven by an $11 million decrease in resale volume and a $7 million decrease in volume from refinancing transactions partially offset by a $13 million increase in underwriter revenue. The refinancing activity was weighted towards the second half of 2010 when mortgage rates fell below 5% for an extended period of time. EBITDA increased $5 million primarily due to $7 million of cost reductions offset by the decrease in revenues discussed above.
2010 and 2009 Restructuring Programs
During the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company committed to various initiatives targeted principally at reducing costs and enhancing organizational efficiencies while consolidating existing processes and facilities. The following are total restructuring charges by segment as of December 31:
|
| | | | | | | |
| 2010 | | 2009 |
| Expense Recognized and Other Additions | | Expense Recognized and Other Additions (b) |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | — |
| | $ | 3 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 13 |
| | 52 |
|
Relocation Services | 4 |
| (a) | 9 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 3 |
| | 3 |
|
Corporate and Other | 2 |
| | 7 |
|
| $ | 22 |
| | $ | 74 |
|
_______________
| |
(a) | Includes $1 million of unfavorable lease liability recorded in purchase accounting for Primacy which was reclassified to restructuring liability as a result of the Company restructuring certain facilities after the acquisition date. |
| |
(b) | During the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company reversed $4 million in the Consolidated Statement of Operations related to restructuring accruals established in 2006 through 2008. |
FINANCIAL CONDITION, LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
FINANCIAL CONDITION
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| December 31, 2011 | | December 31, 2010 | | Change |
Total assets | $ | 7,350 |
| | $ | 7,569 |
| | $ | (219 | ) |
Total liabilities | $ | 8,849 |
| | $ | 8,632 |
| | $ | 217 |
|
Total equity (deficit) | $ | (1,499 | ) | | $ | (1,063 | ) | | $ | (436 | ) |
For the year ended December 31, 2011, total assets decreased $219 million primarily as a result of a decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $49 million, a $21 million decrease in other current assets, a decrease in franchise agreements intangible assets, other intangibles and property and equipment of $67 million, $39 million and $21 million, respectively, due to amortization and depreciation and an $10 million decrease in deferred taxes.
Total liabilities increased $217 million principally due to a $258 million increase in long term debt, primarily as a result of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions, partially offset by a $24 million decrease in due to former parent and a $19 million decrease in accounts payable.
Total equity (deficit) decreased $436 million primarily due to the net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy of $441 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Our liquidity position has been and is expected to continue to be negatively affected by the ongoing unfavorable conditions in the real estate market resulting in negative operating cash flows, the substantial interest expense on our debt obligations and potential adverse changes in interest rates. Our liquidity position would also be adversely impacted by our inability to access our relocation securitization programs and could be adversely impacted by our inability to access the capital markets. In addition, our short-term liquidity position from time to time has been and may continue to be negatively affected by seasonal fluctuations in the residential real estate brokerage business.
Although we have seen improvement in affordability and stabilization in homesale sides at our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment and average sales price at our Real Estate Franchise Services segment, we are not certain whether these signs of stabilization will lead to a recovery. We cannot predict when the residential real estate industry will return to a period of sustainable growth. Moreover, if the residential real estate market or the economy as a whole does not improve, we may experience further adverse effects on our business, financial condition and liquidity, including our ability to access capital.
Our primary liquidity needs will be to service our debt and finance our working capital and capital expenditures, which we have historically satisfied with cash flows from operations and funds available under our revolving credit facilities and securitization facilities. After giving effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, we estimate that our annual cash interest will increase on a pro forma annualized basis by approximately $46 million from approximately $616 million to $662 million based on our pro forma debt balances as of December 31, 2011 and assuming LIBOR rates as of December 31, 2011. Primarily as a consequence of our cash interest obligations, we expect to experience negative cash flows in 2012 given our operating environment. However, if conditions in the real estate market do not deteriorate further, given our availability under our extended revolving credit facility and other sources of liquidity which we believe are available to us, we believe we will be able to meet our cash flow needs through December 31, 2012.
Historically, operating results and revenues for all of our businesses have been strongest in the second and third quarters of the calendar year. A significant portion of the expenses we incur in our real estate brokerage operations are related to marketing activities and commissions and are, therefore, variable. However, many of our other expenses, such as interest payments, facilities costs and certain personnel-related costs, are fixed and cannot be reduced during a seasonal slowdown. For example, interest payments of approximately $215 million are due on our Unsecured Notes and Second Lien Loans in October and April of each year. Because of this asymmetry and the size of our cash interest obligations, if unfavorable conditions in the real estate market and general macroeconomic conditions do not significantly improve, we would be required to seek additional sources of working capital for our future liquidity needs, including obtaining additional financing and deferring or reducing spending. There can be no assurance that we would be able to defer or reduce expenses or that
any such actions would not materially and adversely impact our business and results of operations or that we would be able to obtain financing on acceptable terms or at all.
We will continue to evaluate potential financing transactions, including refinancing certain tranches of our indebtedness, issuing incremental debt, obtaining incremental letters of credit and extending maturities as well as potential transactions pursuant to which third parties, Apollo or its affiliates may provide financing to us or otherwise engage in transactions to provide liquidity to us. There can be no assurance as to which, if any, of these alternatives we may pursue as the choice of any alternative will depend upon numerous factors such as market conditions, our financial performance and the limitations applicable to such transactions under our existing financing agreements and the consents we may need to obtain under the relevant documents. There also can be no assurance that financing or refinancing will be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. In addition, the conversion of all or a portion of our approximately $2.1 billion in outstanding Convertible Notes into equity at the option of the holders thereof would increase our liquidity, although the holders of the Convertible Notes are not obligated to do so.
Future indebtedness may impose various additional restrictions and covenants on us which could limit our ability to respond to market conditions, to make capital investments or to take advantage of business opportunities. Our ability to make payments to fund working capital, capital expenditures, debt service, and strategic acquisitions will depend on our ability to generate cash in the future, which is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control.
Cash Flows
Year ended December 31, 2011 vs. year ended December 31, 2010
At December 31, 2011, we had $143 million of cash and cash equivalents, a decrease of $49 million compared to the balance of $192 million at December 31, 2010. The following table summarizes our cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | Change |
Cash provided by (used in): | | | | | |
Operating activities | $ | (192 | ) | | $ | (118 | ) | | $ | (74 | ) |
Investing activities | (49 | ) | | (70 | ) | | 21 |
|
Financing activities | 192 |
| | 124 |
| | 68 |
|
Effects of change in exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents | — |
| | 1 |
| | (1 | ) |
Net change in cash and cash equivalents | $ | (49 | ) | | $ | (63 | ) | | $ | 14 |
|
For the year ended December 31, 2011, we used $74 million of additional cash in operations compared to the same period in 2010. For the year ended December 31, 2011, $192 million of cash was used in operating activities due to negative cash flows from operating results of $201 million after $608 million of cash interest payments, partially offset by an increase in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities of $23 million. For the year ended December 31, 2010, $118 million of cash was used in operating activities due to uses of cash related to trade receivables and relocation receivables of $9 million and $27 million, respectively, as well as by negative cash flows from operating results of $152 million after $550 million of cash interest payments, partially offset by sources of cash related to accounts payable and relocation properties held for sale of $30 million and $43 million, respectively.
For the year ended December 31, 2011, we used $21 million less cash for investing activities compared to the same period in 2010. For the year ended December 31, 2011, $49 million of cash was used in investing activities primarily due to $49 million of property and equipment additions and acquisition related payments of $6 million, partially offset by a $6 million change in restricted cash and net proceeds from certificates of deposit of $5 million. For the year ended December 31, 2010, $70 million of cash was used in investing activities and was primarily due to $49 million of property and equipment additions, $17 million related to acquisition related payments and the purchase of certificates of deposit for $9 million, partially offset by proceeds from the sale of assets of $5 million.
For the year ended December 31, 2011, we generated $68 million more cash from financing activities compared to the same period in 2010. For the year ended December 31, 2011, $192 million of cash was provided by financing activities and was comprised of $700 million of proceeds from the issuance of the Existing First and a Half Lien Notes, $98 million
related to the proceeds from the extension of the term loan facility and an increase in incremental revolver borrowings of $145 million, partially offset by $706 million of term loan facility repayments and the payment of $35 million of debt issuance costs. On December 14, 2011, Realogy entered into agreements to amend and extend the existing Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program which resulted in the pay off of the 2007 securitization notes and issuance of the 2011 securitization notes under the extended securitization facility. For the year ended December 31, 2010, $124 million of cash was provided by financing activities and was comprised of $142 million of proceeds from drawings on our unsecured revolving credit facilities and additional securitization obligations of $27 million, partially offset by $32 million of term loan facility repayments.
Year ended December 31, 2010 vs. year ended December 31, 2009
At December 31, 2010, we had $192 million of cash and cash equivalents, a decrease of $63 million compared to the balance of $255 million at December 31, 2009. The following table summarizes our cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009: |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, |
| 2010 | | 2009 | | Change |
Cash provided by (used in): | | | | | |
Operating activities | $ | (118 | ) | | $ | 341 |
| | $ | (459 | ) |
Investing activities | (70 | ) | | (47 | ) | | (23 | ) |
Financing activities | 124 |
| | (479 | ) | | 603 |
|
Effects of change in exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents | 1 |
| | 3 |
| | (2 | ) |
Net change in cash and cash equivalents | $ | (63 | ) | | $ | (182 | ) | | $ | 119 |
|
For the year ended December 31, 2010 we used $459 million of additional cash in operations compared to the same period in 2009. For the year ended December 31, 2010, $118 million of cash was used in operating activities due to uses of cash related to trade receivables and relocation receivables of $9 million and $27 million, respectively, as well as by negative cash flows from operating results of $152 million after $550 million of cash interest payments, partially offset by sources of cash related to accounts payable and relocation properties held for sale of $30 million and $43 million, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2009, $341 million of cash was provided by operating activities and was comprised of sources of cash related to relocation receivables and relocation properties held for sale of $442 million and $22 million, respectively, and trade receivables and accounts payable of $40 million and $26 million, respectively, partially offset by a $48 million use of cash related to due from former parent and negative cash flows from operating results of $200 million after $487 million of cash interest payments.
For the year ended December 31, 2010 we used $23 million more cash for investing activities compared to the same period in 2009. For the year ended December 31, 2010, $70 million of cash was used in investing activities and was primarily due to $49 million of property and equipment additions, $17 million related to acquisition related payments and the purchase of certificates of deposit for $9 million, partially offset by proceeds from the sale of assets of $5 million. For the year ended December 31, 2009, $47 million of cash was used in investing activities and was primarily comprised of $40 million of property and equipment additions and $5 million related to acquisition related payments.
For the year ended December 31, 2010 we provided $603 million more cash from financing activities compared to the same period in 2009. For the year ended December 31, 2010, $124 million of cash was provided by financing activities and was comprised of $142 million of proceeds from drawings on our unsecured revolving credit facilities and additional securitization obligations of $27 million, partially offset by $32 million of term loan facility repayments. For the year ended December 31, 2009, $479 million of cash was used in financing activities and was comprised of $410 million of securitization obligation repayments, a decrease in incremental revolver borrowings of $515 million and $32 million of term loan facility repayments, partially offset by proceeds of $500 million related to the issuance of the Second Lien Loans (as defined below).
Financial Obligations
Indebtedness Table
As of December 31, 2011, the total capacity, outstanding borrowings and available capacity under the Company’s borrowing arrangements were as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest Rate | | Expiration Date | | Total Capacity | | Outstanding Borrowings | | Available Capacity |
Senior Secured Credit Facility: | | | | | | | | | |
Non-extended revolving credit facility (1) | (2) | | April 2013 | | $ | 289 |
| | $ | 78 |
| | $ | 158 |
|
Extended revolving credit facility (1) | (2) | | April 2016 | | 363 |
| | 97 |
| | 200 |
|
Non-extended term loan facility | (3) | | October 2013 | | 629 |
| | 629 |
| | — |
|
Extended term loan facility | (3) | | October 2016 | | 1,822 |
| | 1,822 |
| | — |
|
Existing First and a Half Lien Notes | 7.875% | | February 2019 | | 700 |
| | 700 |
| | — |
|
Second Lien Loans | 13.50% | | October 2017 | | 650 |
| | 650 |
| | — |
|
Other bank indebtedness (4) | | | Various | | 133 |
| | 133 |
| | — |
|
Existing Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
Senior Notes | 10.50% | | April 2014 | | 64 |
| | 64 |
| | — |
|
Senior Toggle Notes | 11.00% | | April 2014 | | 52 |
| | 52 |
| | — |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes(5) | 12.375% | | April 2015 | | 190 |
| | 187 |
| | — |
|
Extended Maturity Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
Senior Notes(6) | 11.50% | | April 2017 | | 492 |
| | 489 |
| | — |
|
Senior Notes(7) | 12.00% | | April 2017 | | 130 |
| | 129 |
| | — |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes | 13.375% | | April 2018 | | 10 |
| | 10 |
| | — |
|
Convertible Notes | 11.00% | | April 2018 | | 2,110 |
| | 2,110 |
| | — |
|
Securitization obligations:(8) | | | | | | | | | |
Apple Ridge Funding LLC | | | December 2013 | | 400 |
| | 296 |
| | 104 |
|
Cartus Financing Limited(9) | | | Various | | 62 |
| | 31 |
| | 31 |
|
| | | | | $ | 8,096 |
| | $ | 7,477 |
| | $ | 493 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | The available capacity under these facilities was reduced by $53 million and $66 million of outstanding letters of credit on the non-extended and the extended revolving credit facility, respectively, at December 31, 2011. On February 2, 2012, the Company completed the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering (described below) which, among other things, terminated availability under the non-extended revolving credit facility. On February 27, 2012, the Company had $55 million outstanding on the extended revolving credit facility and $81 million of outstanding letters of credit. |
| |
(2) | Interest rates with respect to revolving loans under the senior secured credit facility are based on, at Realogy’s option, adjusted LIBOR plus 2.25% (or with respect to the extended revolving loans, 3.25%) or ABR plus 1.25% (or with respect to the extended revolving loans, 2.25%) in each case subject to reductions based on the attainment of certain leverage ratios. |
| |
(3) | Interest rates with respect to term loans under the senior secured credit facility are based on, at Realogy’s option, (a) adjusted LIBOR plus 3.0% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 4.25%) or (b) the higher of the Federal Funds Effective Rate plus 0.5% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 1.75%) and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s prime rate (“ABR”) plus 2.0% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 3.25%). |
| |
(4) | Consists of revolving credit facilities that are supported by letters of credit issued under the senior secured credit facility, $75 million due in July 2012, $8 million due in August 2012 and $50 million due in January 2013. In January 2012, Realogy repaid $25 million of the outstanding borrowings and reduced the capacity of the credit facility due in July 2012 by $25 million. |
| |
(5) | Consists of $190 million of 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2015, less a discount of $3 million. |
| |
(6) | Consists of $492 million of 11.50% Senior Notes due 2017, less a discount of $3 million. |
| |
(7) | Consists of $130 million of 12.00% Senior Notes due 2017, less a discount of $1 million. |
| |
(8) | Available capacity is subject to maintaining sufficient relocation related assets to collateralize these securitization obligations. |
| |
(9) | Consists of a £35 million facility which expires in August 2015 and a £5 million working capital facility which expires in August 2012. |
2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering
On February 2, 2012, Realogy issued $593 million of First Lien Notes and $325 million of New First and a Half Lien Notes, the proceeds of which were used to repay amounts outstanding under its senior secured credit facility. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are senior secured obligations of the Company and will mature on January 15, 2020. Interest is payable semiannually on January 15 and July 15 of each year, commencing July 15, 2012. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes were issued in a private offering that is exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act.
The Company used the proceeds from the offering, of approximately $918 million, to: (i) prepay $629 million of its non-extended term loan borrowings under its senior secured credit facility which were due to mature in October 2013, (ii) repay all of the $133 million in outstanding borrowings under its non-extended revolving credit facility which was due to mature in April 2013, and (iii) repay $156 million of the outstanding borrowings under its extended revolving credit facility. In conjunction with the repayments of $289 million described in clauses (ii) and (iii), the Company reduced the commitments under its non-extended revolving credit facility by a like amount, thereby terminating the non-extended revolving credit facility. After giving effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, we estimate that our annual cash interest will increase on a pro forma annualized basis by approximately $46 million from approximately $616 million to $662 million based on our debt balances as of December 31, 2011 and assuming LIBOR rates as of December 31, 2011.
The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are guaranteed on a senior secured basis by Domus Intermediate Holdings Corp., Realogy's parent, and each domestic subsidiary of Realogy that is a guarantor under its senior secured credit facility and certain of its outstanding securities. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are also guaranteed by Holdings, on an unsecured senior subordinated basis. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are secured by substantially the same collateral as Realogy's existing obligations under its senior secured credit facility. The priority of the collateral liens securing the First Lien Notes is (i) equal to the collateral liens securing Realogy's first lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility and (ii) senior to the collateral liens securing Realogy's other secured obligations that are not secured by a first priority lien, including the First and a Half Lien Notes, and Realogy's second lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility. The priority of the collateral liens securing the New First and a Half Lien Notes is (i) junior to the collateral liens securing Realogy's first lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility and the First Lien Notes, (ii) equal to the collateral liens securing the Existing First and a Half Lien Notes, and (iii) senior to the collateral liens securing Realogy's second lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility.
Pro forma Indebtedness Table
The debt table below gives effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering as if it occurred on December 31, 2011:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest Rate | | Expiration Date | | Total Capacity | | Outstanding Borrowings | | Available Capacity |
Senior Secured Credit Facility: | | | | | | | | | |
Extended revolving credit facility (1) | (2) | | April 2016 | | 363 |
| | 97 |
| | 172 |
|
Extended term loan facility | (3) | | October 2016 | | 1,822 |
| | 1,822 |
| | — |
|
First Lien Notes | 7.625% | | January 2020 | | 593 |
| | 593 |
| | — |
|
Existing First and a Half Lien Notes | 7.875% | | February 2019 | | 700 |
| | 700 |
| | — |
|
New First and a Half Lien Notes | 9.00% | | January 2020 | | 325 |
| | 325 |
| | — |
|
Second Lien Loans | 13.50% | | October 2017 | | 650 |
| | 650 |
| | — |
|
Other bank indebtedness (4) | | | Various | | 133 |
| | 133 |
| | — |
|
Existing Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
Senior Notes | 10.50% | | April 2014 | | 64 |
| | 64 |
| | — |
|
Senior Toggle Notes | 11.00% | | April 2014 | | 52 |
| | 52 |
| | — |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes (5) | 12.375% | | April 2015 | | 190 |
| | 187 |
| | — |
|
Extended Maturity Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
Senior Notes (6) | 11.50% | | April 2017 | | 492 |
| | 489 |
| | — |
|
Senior Notes (7) | 12.00% | | April 2017 | | 130 |
| | 129 |
| | — |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes | 13.375% | | April 2018 | | 10 |
| | 10 |
| | — |
|
Convertible Notes | 11.00% | | April 2018 | | 2,110 |
| | 2,110 |
| | — |
|
Securitization obligations: (8) | | | | | | | | | |
Apple Ridge Funding LLC | | | December 2013 | | 400 |
| | 296 |
| | 104 |
|
Cartus Financing Limited (9) | | | Various | | 62 |
| | 31 |
| | 31 |
|
| | | | | $ | 8,096 |
| | $ | 7,688 |
| | $ | 307 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | The available capacity under this facility was reduced by $94 million of outstanding letters of credit after taking into consideration the $25 million reduction in letters of credit backed revolving credit borrowings that occurred in January 2012. On February 27, 2012, the Company had $55 million outstanding on the extended revolving credit facility and $81 million of outstanding letters of credit. |
| |
(2) | Interest rates with respect to revolving loans under the senior secured credit facility are based on, at Realogy’s option, adjusted LIBOR plus 2.25% (or with respect to the extended revolving loans, 3.25%) or ABR plus 1.25% (or with respect to the extended revolving loans, 2.25%) in each case subject to reductions based on the attainment of certain leverage ratios. |
| |
(3) | Interest rates with respect to term loans under the senior secured credit facility are based on, at Realogy’s option, (a) adjusted LIBOR plus 3.0% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 4.25%) or (b) the higher of the Federal Funds Effective Rate plus 0.5% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 1.75%) and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s prime rate (“ABR”) plus 2.0% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 3.25%). |
| |
(4) | Consists of revolving credit facilities that are supported by letters of credit issued under the senior secured credit facility, $75 million due in July 2012, $8 million due in August 2012 and $50 million due in January 2013. In January 2012, Realogy repaid $25 million of the outstanding borrowings and reduced the capacity of the credit facility due in July 2012 by $25 million. |
| |
(5) | Consists of $190 million of 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2015, less a discount of $3 million. |
| |
(6) | Consists of $492 million of 11.50% Senior Notes due 2017, less a discount of $3 million. |
| |
(7) | Consists of $130 million of 12.00% Senior Notes due 2017, less a discount of $1 million. |
| |
(8) | Available capacity is subject to maintaining sufficient relocation related assets to collateralize these securitization obligations. |
| |
(9) | Consists of a £35 million facility which expires in August 2015 and a £5 million working capital facility which expires in August 2012. |
2011 Refinancing Transactions
In January and February of 2011, Realogy completed a series of transactions, referred to herein as the “2011 Refinancing Transactions,” to refinance portions of its senior secured credit facility and unsecured notes.
Debt Exchange Offering
On January 5, 2011, we completed private exchange offers under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act, relating to its outstanding Existing Notes (the “Debt Exchange Offering”). As a result of the Debt Exchange Offering, $2,110 million of Existing Notes were tendered for Convertible Notes, $632 million of Existing Notes were tendered for Extended Maturity Notes and $303 million of Existing Notes remained outstanding.
Amendment to Senior Secured Credit Facility
Effective February 3, 2011, we entered into a first amendment to our senior secured credit facility (the “Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment”) and an incremental assumption agreement, which resulted in the following: (i) extended the maturity of a significant portion of our first lien term loans to October 10, 2016 and increased the interest rate with respect to the extended term loans; (ii) extended the maturity of a significant portion of the loans and commitments under our revolving credit facility to April 10, 2016, increased the interest rate with respect to the extended revolving loans and converted a portion of the extended revolving loans to extended term loans ($98 million in the aggregate); (iii) extended the maturity of a significant portion of the commitments under our synthetic letter of credit facility to October 10, 2016 and increased the fee with respect to the extended synthetic letter of credit commitments; and (iv) allowed for the issuance of $700 million aggregate principal amount of Existing First and a Half Lien Notes, the net proceeds of which, along with cash on hand, were used to prepay $700 million of the outstanding extended term loans. The Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment also provides for the incurrence of additional incremental term loans that are secured on a junior basis to the second lien loans in an aggregate amount not to exceed $350 million.
Additionally, the Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment provides that the First and a Half Lien Notes will not constitute senior secured debt for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio covenant under our senior secured credit facility.
Issuance of Existing First and a Half Lien Notes
On February 3, 2011, the Company issued $700 million aggregate principal amount of Existing First and a Half Lien Notes in a private offering exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act. The Existing First and a Half Lien Notes are secured by substantially the same collateral as the Company’s existing secured obligations under its senior secured credit facility, but the priority of the collateral liens securing the Existing First and a Half Lien Notes is (i) junior to the collateral liens securing the Company’s first lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility and the First Lien Notes, (ii) equal to the collateral liens securing the New First and a Half Lien Notes and (iii) senior to the collateral liens securing the Company’s second lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility. The Existing First and a Half Lien Notes mature on February 1, 2019 and bear interest at a rate of 7.875% per annum, payable semiannually on February 15 and August 15 of each year.
As discussed above, the net proceeds from the offering of the First and a Half Lien Notes, along with cash on hand, were used to prepay $700 million of certain of the first lien term loans that were extended in connection with the Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment.
Senior Secured Credit Facility
Realogy has a senior secured credit facility which consists of (i) term loan facilities, (ii) revolving credit facilities, (iii) a synthetic letter of credit facility (the facilities described in clauses (i), (ii) and (iii), as amended by the Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment, collectively referred to as the “First Lien Facilities”), and (iv) an incremental (or accordion) loan facility, a portion of which was utilized in connection with the incurrence of Second Lien Loans in 2009 as described below.
The extended term loans do not require any scheduled amortization of principal. Prior to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, the non-extended term loan facility provided for quarterly amortization payments totaling 1% per annum of the principal amount of the non-extended term loans.
Realogy uses the revolving credit facility for, among other things, working capital and other general corporate purposes. The loans under the First Lien Facilities (the “First Lien Loans”) are secured to the extent legally permissible by
substantially all of the assets of Realogy, Intermediate and the subsidiary guarantors, including but not limited to (i) a first-priority pledge of substantially all capital stock held by Realogy or any subsidiary guarantor (which pledge, with respect to obligations in respect of the borrowings secured by a pledge of the stock of any first-tier foreign subsidiary, is limited to 100% of the non-voting stock (if any) and 65% of the voting stock of such foreign subsidiary), and (ii) perfected first-priority security interests in substantially all tangible and intangible assets of Realogy and each subsidiary guarantor, subject to certain exceptions.
In late 2009, Realogy incurred $650 million of Second Lien Loans (the "Second Lien Loans"). The Second Lien Loans are secured by liens on the assets of Realogy and by the guarantors that secure the First Lien Loans. However, such liens are junior in priority to the First Lien Loans, the First Lien Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes. The Second Lien Loans interest payments are payable semi-annually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The Second Lien Loans mature on October 15, 2017 and there are no required amortization payments.
The senior secured credit facility also provides for a synthetic letter of credit facility which is for: (i) the support of Realogy’s obligations with respect to Cendant contingent and other liabilities assumed under the Separation and Distribution Agreement and (ii) general corporate purposes in an amount not to exceed $100 million. The synthetic letter of credit facility capacity is $187 million at December 31, 2011, of which $43 million will expire in October 2013 and $144 million will expire in October 2016. As of December 31, 2011, the capacity was being utilized by a $70 million letter of credit with Cendant for any remaining potential contingent obligations and $100 million of letters of credit for general corporate purposes.
Realogy’s senior secured credit facility contains financial, affirmative and negative covenants and requires Realogy to maintain a senior secured leverage ratio not to exceed a maximum amount on the last day of each fiscal quarter. Specifically, Realogy’s total senior secured net debt to trailing twelve month EBITDA may not exceed 4.75 to 1.0. EBITDA, as defined in the senior secured credit facility, includes certain adjustments and is calculated on a “pro forma” basis for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio. In this report, the Company refers to the term “Adjusted EBITDA” to mean EBITDA as so defined for purposes of determining compliance with the senior secured leverage covenant. Total senior secured net debt does not include the First and a Half Lien Notes, Second Lien Loans, other bank indebtedness not secured by a first lien on Realogy or its subsidiaries assets, securitization obligations or the Unsecured Notes. At December 31, 2011, Realogy’s senior secured leverage ratio was 4.44 to 1.0. After giving effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, Realogy's senior secured leverage ratio would have been 3.87 to 1.0 at December 31, 2011.
Realogy has the right to cure an event of default of the senior secured leverage ratio in three of any of the four consecutive quarters through the issuance of additional Holdings equity for cash, which would be infused as capital into Realogy. The effect of such infusion would be to increase Adjusted EBITDA for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio for the applicable twelve-month period and reduce net senior secured indebtedness upon actual receipt of such capital. If Realogy is unable to maintain compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio and fails to remedy a default through an equity cure as described above, there would be an “event of default” under the senior secured credit facility. Other events of default under the senior secured credit facility include, without limitation, nonpayment, material misrepresentations, insolvency, bankruptcy, certain material judgments, change of control and cross-events of default on material indebtedness.
If an event of default occurs under the senior secured credit facility, and Realogy fails to obtain a waiver from the lenders, Realogy’s financial condition, results of operations and business would be materially adversely affected. Upon the occurrence of an event of default under the senior secured credit facility, the lenders:
| |
• | would not be required to lend any additional amounts to Realogy; |
| |
• | could elect to declare all borrowings outstanding, together with accrued and unpaid interest and fees, to be due and payable; |
| |
• | could require Realogy to apply all of its available cash to repay these borrowings; or |
| |
• | could prevent Realogy from making payments on the First and a Half Lien Notes or the Unsecured Notes; |
any of which could result in an event of default under the First and a Half Lien Notes, the Unsecured Notes and the Company’s Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program.
If the Company were unable to repay those amounts, the lenders under the senior secured credit facility could proceed against the collateral granted to secure the senior secured credit facility and its other secured indebtedness. The Company has pledged the majority of its assets as collateral to secure such indebtedness. If the lenders under the senior secured credit
facility were to accelerate the repayment of borrowings, then the Company may not have sufficient assets to repay the senior secured credit facility and its other indebtedness, including the First Lien Notes, the First and a Half Lien Notes and the Unsecured Notes, or be able to borrow sufficient funds to refinance such indebtedness. Even if the Company is able to obtain new financing, it may not be on commercially reasonable terms, or terms that are acceptable to the Company.
Other Bank Indebtedness
Realogy has separate revolving U.S. credit facilities under which it could borrow up to $125 million at December 31, 2011 and $155 million at December 31, 2010 and a separate U.K. credit facility under which it could borrow up to £5 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010. These facilities are not secured by assets of Realogy or any of its subsidiaries but are supported by letters of credit issued under the senior secured credit facility. The facilities generally have a one-year term with certain options for renewal. As of December 31, 2011, Realogy had outstanding borrowings of $133 million under these credit facilities with $75 million due in July 2012, $8 million due in August 2012 and $50 million due in January 2013. In January 2012, Realogy repaid $25 million of the outstanding borrowings and reduced the capacity of the credit facility due in July 2012 by $25 million. For the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, the weighted average interest rate was 2.9% and 3.0%, respectively, under the U.S. credit facilities and 2.5% and 2.5%, respectively, under the U.K. credit facility with interest payable either monthly or quarterly.
Unsecured Notes
On April 10, 2007, Realogy issued $1,700 million of Senior Notes due 2014, $550 million of Senior Toggle Notes due 2014 and $875 million of Senior Subordinated Notes due 2015.
On January 5, 2011, Realogy consummated the Debt Exchange Offering for a portion of its Existing Notes pursuant to which Realogy issued the Extended Maturity Notes and three series of Convertible Notes. Pursuant to the Debt Exchange Offering, $2,110 million aggregate principal amount of the Existing Notes were tendered for Convertible Notes, which are convertible at the holder’s option into Class A Common Stock, and $632 million aggregate principal amount of the Existing Notes were tendered for the Extended Maturity Notes.
As a result of the Debt Exchange Offering, Realogy extended the maturity of $2,742 million aggregate principal amount of the Unsecured Notes to 2017 and 2018, leaving $303 million aggregate principal amount of Existing Notes that mature in 2014 and 2015. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the indenture governing the terms of the Convertible Notes, the Convertible Notes are redeemable at Realogy’s option at a price equal to 90% of the principal amount thereof, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption upon a Qualified Public Offering.
The 10.50% Senior Notes mature on April 15, 2014 and bear interest payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The 11.50% Senior Notes mature on April 15, 2017 and bear interest payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year.
The Senior Toggle Notes mature on April 15, 2014. Interest is payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. For any interest payment period after the initial interest payment period and through October 15, 2011, Realogy had the option to pay interest on the Senior Toggle Notes (i) entirely in cash (“Cash Interest”), (ii) entirely by increasing the principal amount of the outstanding Senior Toggle Notes or by issuing Senior Toggle Notes (“PIK Interest”), or (iii) 50% as Cash Interest and 50% as PIK Interest. Cash Interest on the Senior Toggle Notes accrues at a rate of 11.00% per annum. PIK Interest on the Senior Toggle Notes accrues at the Cash Interest rate per annum plus 0.75%. Beginning with the interest period which ended October 2008 through the interest period which ended April 2011, Realogy elected to satisfy its interest payment obligations by issuing additional Senior Toggle Notes. Realogy elected to pay Cash Interest for the interest period commencing April 15, 2011 and is required to make all future interest payments on the Senior Toggle Notes entirely in cash until they mature.
Realogy would be subject to certain interest deduction limitations if the Senior Toggle Notes were treated as “applicable high yield discount obligations” (“AHYDO”) within the meaning of Section 163(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended. In order to avoid such treatment, Realogy is required to redeem for cash a portion of each Senior Toggle Note then outstanding at the end of the accrual period ending in April 2012. The portion of a Senior Toggle Note required to be redeemed is an amount equal to the excess of the accrued original issue discount as of the end of such accrual period, less the amount of interest paid in cash on or before such date, less the first-year yield (the issue price of the debt instrument multiplied by its yield to maturity). For the periods that Realogy elected to pay PIK Interest, Realogy will be required to repay approximately $11 million in April 2012.
The 12.00% Senior Notes mature on April 15, 2017 and bear interest payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes mature on April 15, 2015 and bear interest payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The 13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes mature on April 15, 2018 and bear interest payable on April 15 and October 15 of each year.
The Senior Notes are guaranteed on an unsecured senior basis, and the Senior Subordinated Notes are guaranteed on an unsecured senior subordinated basis, in each case, by each of Realogy’s existing and future U.S. subsidiaries that is a guarantor under the senior secured credit facility or that guarantees certain other indebtedness in the future, subject to certain exceptions. The Senior Notes are guaranteed by Holdings on an unsecured senior subordinated basis and the Senior Subordinated Notes are guaranteed by Holdings on an unsecured junior subordinated basis.
On June 24, 2011, Realogy completed offers of exchange notes for Extended Maturity Notes issued in the Debt Exchange Offering. The term “exchange notes” refers to the 11.50% Senior Notes due 2017, the 12.00% Senior Notes due 2017 and the 13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2018, all as registered under the Securities Act, pursuant to a Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-173254 declared effective by the SEC on May 20, 2011). Each series of the exchange notes are substantially identical in all material respects to the Extended Maturity Notes of the applicable series issued in the Debt Exchange Offering (except that the new registered exchange notes do not contain terms with respect to additional interest or transfer restrictions). Unless the context otherwise requires, the term “Extended Maturity Notes” refers to the exchange notes.
Convertible Notes
The Series A Convertible Notes, Series B Convertible Notes and Series C Convertible Notes mature on April 15, 2018 and bear interest at a rate per annum of 11.00% payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The Convertible Notes are convertible into Class A Common Stock at any time prior to April 15, 2018. The Series A Convertible Notes and Series B Convertible Notes are initially convertible into 39.0244 shares of Class A Common Stock per $1,000 aggregate principal amount of Series A Convertible Notes and Series B Convertible Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $25.625 per share, and the Series C Convertible Notes are initially convertible into 37.0714 shares of Class A Common Stock per $1,000 aggregate principal amount of Series C Convertible Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $26.975 per share, subject to adjustment if specified distributions to holders of the Class A Common Stock are made or specified corporate transactions occur, in each case as set forth in the indenture governing the Convertible Notes. The Convertible Notes are guaranteed on an unsecured senior subordinated basis by each of Realogy’s existing and future U.S. subsidiaries that is a guarantor under the senior secured credit facility or that guarantees certain other indebtedness in the future, subject to certain exceptions. The Convertible Notes are guaranteed on an unsecured junior subordinated basis by Holdings.
Following a Qualified Public Offering, Realogy may, at its option, redeem the Convertible Notes, in whole or in part, at a redemption price, payable in cash, equal to 90% of the principal amount of the Convertible Notes to be redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon to, but excluding, the redemption date.
On June 16, 2011, the SEC declared effective a Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-173250) of Holdings and Realogy, registering for resale the outstanding Convertible Notes and the Class A Common Stock of Holdings issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes. Offers and sales of the Convertible Notes and Class A Common Stock may be made by selling securityholders pursuant to the June 2011 Final Prospectus as amended or supplemented from time to time.
Loss (Gain) on the Early Extinguishment of Debt and Write-Off of Deferred Financing Costs
As a result of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions, the Company recorded a loss on the early extinguishment of debt of $36 million and wrote off deferred financing costs of $7 million to interest expense as a result of debt modifications during the year ended December 31, 2011.
On September 24, 2009, Realogy and certain affiliates of Apollo entered into an agreement with a third party pursuant to which Realogy exchanged approximately $221 million aggregate principal amount of Senior Toggle Notes held by it for $150 million aggregate principal amount of Second Lien Loans. The third party also sold the balance of the Senior Toggle Notes it held for cash to an affiliate of Apollo in a privately negotiated transaction and used a portion of the cash proceeds to participate as a lender in the Second Lien Loan transaction. The transaction with the third party closed concurrently with the initial closing of the Second Lien Loans. As a result of the exchange, the Company recorded a gain on the extinguishment of debt of $75 million.
Securitization Obligations
Realogy has secured obligations through Apple Ridge Funding LLC, a securitization program which was due to expire in April 2012. On December 14, 2011, Realogy entered into agreements to amend and extend the existing Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program. The maturity date has been extended until December 2013. The maximum borrowing capacity remained at $400 million.
In 2010, Realogy, through a special purpose entity, Cartus Financing Limited, entered into agreements providing for a £35 million revolving loan facility which expires in August 2015 and a £5 million working capital facility which expires in August 2012. These Cartus Financing Limited facilities are secured by relocation assets of a U.K. government contract in a special purpose entity and are therefore classified as permitted securitization financings as defined in Realogy’s senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing the Unsecured Notes.
The Apple Ridge entities and Cartus Financing Limited entity are consolidated special purpose entities that are utilized to securitize relocation receivables and related assets. These assets are generated from advancing funds on behalf of clients of Realogy’s relocation business in order to facilitate the relocation of their employees. Assets of these special purpose entities are not available to pay Realogy’s general obligations. Under the Apple Ridge program, provided no termination or amortization event has occurred, any new receivables generated under the designated relocation management agreements are sold into the securitization program and as new eligible relocation management agreements are entered into, the new agreements are designated to the program. The Apple Ridge program has restrictive covenants and trigger events, including performance triggers linked to the age and quality of the underlying assets, foreign obligor limits, multicurrency limits, financial reporting requirements, restrictions on mergers and change of control, breach of Realogy’s senior secured leverage ratio under Realogy’s senior secured credit facility if uncured, and cross-defaults to Realogy’s credit agreement, unsecured and secured notes or other material indebtedness. The occurrence of a trigger event under the Apple Ridge securitization facility could restrict our ability to access new or existing funding under this facility or result in termination of the facility, either of which would adversely affect the operation of our relocation business.
Certain of the funds that the Company receives from relocation receivables and related assets must be utilized to repay securitization obligations. These obligations were collateralized by $366 million and $393 million of underlying relocation receivables and other related relocation assets at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Substantially all relocation related assets are realized in less than twelve months from the transaction date. Accordingly, all of the Company’s securitization obligations are classified as current in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Interest incurred in connection with borrowings under these facilities amounted to $6 million and $7 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. This interest is recorded within net revenues in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations as related borrowings are utilized to fund the Company’s relocation business where interest is generally earned on such assets. These securitization obligations represent floating rate debt for which the average weighted interest rate was 2.1% and 2.4% for the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Covenants under the Senior Secured Credit Facility and Certain Indentures
The senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing the First Lien Notes, First and a Half Lien Notes, the Extended Maturity Notes and the 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes contain various covenants that limit Realogy’s ability to, among other things:
| |
• | incur or guarantee additional debt; |
| |
• | incur debt that is junior to senior indebtedness and senior to the Senior Subordinated Notes; |
| |
• | pay dividends or make distributions to Realogy’s stockholders; |
| |
• | repurchase or redeem capital stock or subordinated indebtedness; |
| |
• | make loans, investments or acquisitions; |
| |
• | incur restrictions on the ability of certain of our subsidiaries to pay dividends or to make other payments to Realogy; |
| |
• | enter into transactions with affiliates; |
| |
• | merge or consolidate with other companies or transfer all or substantially all of our assets; |
| |
• | transfer or sell assets, including capital stock of subsidiaries; and |
| |
• | prepay, redeem or repurchase the Unsecured Notes, the First Lien Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes and debt that is junior in right of payment to the Unsecured Notes, the First Lien Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes. |
In connection with the Debt Exchange Offering, Realogy received consents from the holders of the 10.50% Senior Notes and Senior Toggle Notes to amend the respective indentures governing the terms of such Existing Notes to remove substantially all of the restrictive covenants and certain other provisions previously contained in such indentures.
As a result of the covenants to which we remain subject, we are limited in the manner in which we conduct our business and we may be unable to engage in favorable business activities or finance future operations or capital needs. In addition, on the last day of each fiscal quarter, the financial covenant in the senior secured credit facility requires us to maintain on a quarterly basis a senior secured leverage ratio not to exceed a maximum amount. Specifically, Realogy’s total senior secured net debt to trailing twelve month EBITDA may not exceed 4.75 to 1.0. EBITDA, as defined in the senior secured credit facility, includes certain adjustments and also is calculated on a pro forma basis for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio. In this report, the Company refers to the term “Adjusted EBITDA” to mean EBITDA as so defined for purposes of determining compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio covenant. Total senior secured net debt does not include the Second Lien Loans, securitization obligations, the First and a Half Lien Notes or the Unsecured Notes or other indebtedness secured by a lien that is pari passu or junior in priority to the First and a Half Lien Notes. At December 31, 2011, the Company’s senior secured leverage ratio was 4.44 to 1.0. After giving effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, our senior secured leverage ratio would have been 3.87 to 1.0 at December 31, 2011.
To maintain compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio for the twelve-month periods ending March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2012 (or to avoid an event of default thereof), the Company will need to achieve a certain amount of Adjusted EBITDA and/or reduced levels of total senior secured net debt. The factors that will impact the foregoing include: (a) changes in sales volume and/or the price of existing homesales, (b) the ability to continue to implement cost-savings and business productivity enhancement initiatives, (c) increasing new franchise sales, sales associate recruitment and/or brokerage and other acquisitions, (d) obtaining additional equity financing from our parent company, (e) obtaining additional debt or equity financing, or (f) a combination thereof. Factors (b) through (e) may be insufficient to overcome macroeconomic conditions affecting the Company.
Based upon the Company’s financial forecast, the Company believes that it will continue to be in compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio covenant during the next twelve months. While the housing market has shown signs of stabilization, there remains substantial uncertainty with respect to the timing and scope of a housing recovery and if a housing recovery is delayed or is weak, we may be subject to additional pressure in maintaining compliance with our senior secured leverage ratio.
The Company’s financial forecast of Adjusted EBITDA considers numerous factors including open homesale contract trends, industry forecasts and macroeconomic factors, local market dynamics and concentrations in the markets in which we operate. Our twelve month forecast is updated monthly to consider the actual results of the Company and incorporates current homesale contract activity, updated industry forecasts and macroeconomic factors and changes in local market dynamics as well as additional cost savings and business optimization initiatives underway or to be implemented by management. As such initiatives are implemented, management, as permitted by the existing agreement, will pro forma the effect of such measures and add back the savings or enhanced revenue from those initiatives as if they had been implemented at the beginning of the trailing twelve-month period.
The Company has the right to cure an event of default of the senior secured leverage ratio in three of any of the four consecutive quarters through the issuance of additional Holdings equity for cash, which would be infused as capital into the Company. The effect of such infusion would be to increase Adjusted EBITDA for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio for the applicable twelve-month period and reduce net senior secured indebtedness upon actual receipt of such capital. If we are unable to maintain compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio and we fail to remedy a default through an equity cure as described above, there would be an “event of default” under the senior secured credit agreement. Other events of default under the senior secured credit facility include, without limitation, nonpayment, material misrepresentations, insolvency, bankruptcy, certain material judgments, change of control and cross-events of default on material indebtedness.
If an event of default occurs under the senior secured credit facility and we fail to obtain a waiver from our lenders, our financial condition, results of operations and business would be materially adversely affected. Upon the occurrence of an event of default under the senior secured credit facility, the lenders:
| |
• | would not be required to lend any additional amounts to us; |
| |
• | could elect to declare all borrowings outstanding, together with accrued and unpaid interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable; |
| |
• | could require us to apply all of our available cash to repay these borrowings; or |
| |
• | could prevent us from making payments on the First Lien Notes, the First and a Half Lien Notes or the Unsecured Notes; |
any of which could result in an event of default under the First Lien Notes, the First and a Half Lien Notes or the Unsecured Notes or our Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program.
If we were unable to repay those amounts, the lenders under the senior secured credit facility could proceed against the collateral granted to them to secure that indebtedness. We have pledged the majority of our assets as collateral under the senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing the First Lien Notes and the First and a Half Lien Notes. If the lenders under the senior secured credit facility were to accelerate the repayment of borrowings thereunder, then we may not have sufficient assets to repay the First Lien Loans under the senior secured credit facility and our other indebtedness, including the First Lien Notes, the First and a Half Lien Notes, the Second Lien Loans and the Unsecured Notes, or be able to borrow sufficient funds to refinance such indebtedness. Even if we are able to obtain new financing, it may not be on commercially reasonable terms, or terms that are acceptable to us.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
The SEC has adopted rules to regulate the use in filings with the SEC and in public disclosures of “non-GAAP financial measures,” such as EBITDA, EBITDA before restructuring and other items and Adjusted EBITDA and the ratios related thereto. These measures are derived on the basis of methodologies other than in accordance with GAAP.
EBITDA is defined by us as net income (loss) before depreciation and amortization, interest (income) expense, net (other than relocation services interest for securitization assets and securitization obligations) and income taxes. EBITDA before restructuring and other items is defined by us as EBITDA adjusted for merger costs, restructuring costs, former parent legacy cost (benefit) items, net, and (gain) loss on the early extinguishment of debt. Adjusted EBITDA is presented to demonstrate our compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio covenant in the senior secured credit facility. We present EBITDA, EBITDA before restructuring and other items and Adjusted EBITDA because we believe EBITDA, EBITDA before restructuring and other items and Adjusted EBITDA are useful as supplemental measures in evaluating the performance of our operating businesses and provides greater transparency into our results of operations. Our management, including our chief operating decision maker, use EBITDA and EBITDA before restructuring and other items as a factor in evaluating the performance of our business. EBITDA, EBITDA before restructuring and other items and Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for net income or other statement of operations data prepared in accordance with GAAP.
We believe EBITDA facilitates company-to-company operating performance comparisons by backing out potential differences caused by variations in capital structures (affecting net interest expense), taxation, the age and book depreciation of facilities (affecting relative depreciation expense) and the amortization of intangibles, which may vary for different companies for reasons unrelated to operating performance. We believe EBITDA before restructuring and other items also facilitates company-to-company operating performance comparisons by backing out those items in EBITDA as well as certain historical cost (benefit) items which may vary for different companies for reasons unrelated to operating performance. We further believe that EBITDA is frequently used by securities analysts, investors and other interested parties in their evaluation of companies, many of which present an EBITDA measure when reporting their results.
EBITDA and EBITDA before restructuring and other items have limitations as analytical tools, and you should not consider EBITDA or EBITDA before restructuring and other items either in isolation or as substitutes for analyzing our results as reported under GAAP. Some of these limitations are:
| |
• | these measures do not reflect changes in, or cash requirement for, our working capital needs; |
| |
• | these measures do not reflect our interest expense (except for interest related to our securitization obligations), or the cash requirements necessary to service interest or principal payments on our debt; |
| |
• | these measures do not reflect our income tax expense or the cash requirements to pay our taxes; |
| |
• | these measures do not reflect historical cash expenditures or future requirements for capital expenditures or contractual commitments; |
| |
• | although depreciation and amortization are non-cash charges, the assets being depreciated and amortized will often require replacement in the future, and these measures do not reflect any cash requirements for such replacements; and |
| |
• | other companies may calculate these measures differently so they may not be comparable. |
Adjusted EBITDA as used herein corresponds to the definition of “EBITDA,” calculated on a “pro forma basis,” used in the senior secured credit facility to calculate the senior secured leverage ratio.
Like EBITDA and EBITDA before restructuring and other items, Adjusted EBITDA has limitations as an analytical tool, and you should not consider Adjusted EBITDA either in isolation or as a substitute for analyzing our results as reported under GAAP. In addition to the limitations described above with respect to EBITDA and EBITDA before restructuring and other items, Adjusted EBITDA includes pro forma cost savings, the pro forma effect of business optimization initiatives and the pro forma full year effect of acquisitions and new franchisees. These adjustments may not reflect the actual cost savings or pro forma effect recognized in future periods.
A reconciliation of net loss attributable to Realogy to EBITDA, EBITDA before restructuring and other items and Adjusted EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2011 is set forth in the following table:
|
| | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, 2011 |
Net loss attributable to Realogy | $ | (441 | ) |
Income tax expense (benefit) | 32 |
|
Income before income taxes | (409 | ) |
Interest expense (income), net | 666 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | 186 |
|
EBITDA (a) | 443 |
|
Covenant calculation adjustments: | |
Restructuring costs, merger costs and former parent legacy costs (benefit), net (b) | (3 | ) |
Loss on the early extinguishment of debt | 36 |
|
EBITDA before restructuring and other items | 476 |
|
Pro forma cost savings for 2011 restructuring initiatives (c) | 11 |
|
Pro forma effect of business optimization initiatives (d) | 52 |
|
Non-cash charges (e) | 4 |
|
Non-recurring fair value adjustments for purchase accounting (f) | 4 |
|
Pro forma effect of acquisitions and new franchisees (g) | 7 |
|
Apollo management fees (h) | 15 |
|
Incremental securitization interest costs (i) | 2 |
|
Adjusted EBITDA | $ | 571 |
|
Total senior secured net debt (j) | $ | 2,536 |
|
Senior secured leverage ratio | 4.44 | x |
Pro forma total senior secured net debt (k) | $ | 2,211 |
|
Pro forma senior secured leverage ratio | 3.87 | x |
_______________
| |
(a) | Based on 2011 homesale transactions, a 100 basis point (or 1%) decline in either our homesale sides or the average selling price of closed homesale transactions, with all else being equal, would have decreased EBITDA by $11 million for our Real Estate Franchise Services segment and our Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment combined. |
| |
(b) | Consists of $11 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs offset by a benefit of $15 million of former parent legacy items. |
| |
(c) | Represents actual costs incurred that are not expected to recur in subsequent periods due to restructuring activities initiated during 2011. From this restructuring, we expect to reduce our operating costs by approximately $21 million on a twelve-month run-rate basis and estimate that $10 million of such savings were realized from the time they were put in place. The adjustment shown represents the impact the savings would have had on the period from January 1, 2011 through the time they were put in place, had those actions been effected on January 1, 2011. |
| |
(d) | Represents the twelve-month pro forma effect of business optimization initiatives that have been completed to reduce costs, including $1 million related to our Relocation Services integration costs and acquisition related non-cash adjustments, $6 million related to vendor renegotiations, $41 million for employee retention accruals and $4 million of other initiatives. The employee retention accruals reflect the employee retention plans that have been implemented in lieu of our customary bonus plan, due to the ongoing and prolonged downturn in the housing market in order to ensure the retention of executive officers and other key personnel, principally within our corporate services unit and the corporate offices of our four business units. |
| |
(e) | Represents the elimination of non-cash expenses, including $7 million of stock-based compensation expense and $4 million of other items less $7 million for the change in the allowance for doubtful accounts and notes reserves from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011. |
| |
(f) | Reflects the adjustment for the negative impact of fair value adjustments for purchase accounting at the operating business segments primarily related to deferred rent. |
| |
(g) | Represents the estimated impact of acquisitions and new franchisees as if they had been acquired or signed on January 1, 2011. Franchisee sales activity is comprised of new franchise agreements as well as growth acquired by existing franchisees with our assistance. We have made a number of assumptions in calculating such estimate and there can be no assurance that we would have generated the projected levels of EBITDA had we owned the acquired entities or entered into the franchise contracts as of January 1, 2011. |
| |
(h) | Represents the elimination of annual management fees payable to Apollo for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011. |
| |
(i) | Reflects the incremental borrowing costs incurred as a result of the securitization facilities refinancing for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011. |
| |
(j) | Represents total borrowings under the senior secured credit facility which are secured by a first priority lien on our assets of $2,626 million plus $11 million of capital lease obligations less $101 million of readily available cash as of December 31, 2011. Pursuant to the terms of the senior secured credit facility, senior secured net debt does not include First and a Half Lien Notes, Second Lien Loans, other indebtedness that is secured by a lien that is pari passu or junior to the First and a Half Lien Notes or securitization obligations. |
| |
(k) | Reflects the proceeds of $918 million from the issuance of $593 million of First Lien Notes and $325 million of New First and a Half Lien Notes offset by the payment of $629 million of non-extended term loan borrowings, $78 million of borrowings under the non-extended revolving credit facility and $211 million of additional readily available cash. |
Liquidity Risks
Our liquidity position may be negatively affected as a result of the following specific liquidity risks.
Negative Cash Flows; Seasonality and Cash Requirements
Our liquidity position has been and is expected to continue to be negatively impacted by the ongoing unfavorable conditions in the real estate market resulting in negative cash flows and the substantial interest expense on our debt obligations. Our business segments are also subject to seasonal fluctuations. Historically, operating results and revenues for all of our businesses have been strongest in the second and third quarters of the calendar year. A significant portion of the expenses we incur in our real estate brokerage operations are related to marketing activities and commissions and are, therefore, variable. However, many of our other expenses, such as interest payments, facilities costs and certain personnel-related costs, are fixed and cannot be reduced during a seasonal slowdown. For example, interest payments of approximately $215 million are due on our Unsecured Notes and Second Lien Loans in October and April of each year. Accordingly, the two most significant interest payments fall in, or immediately following, periods of our lowest cash flow generation. Because of this asymmetry and the size of our cash interest obligations, if unfavorable conditions in the real estate market and general macroeconomic conditions do not significantly improve, we would be required to seek additional sources of working capital for our future liquidity needs, including obtaining additional financing from affiliated or non-affiliated debt holders and deferring or reducing spending. There can be no assurance that we would be able to defer or reduce expenses or that any such actions would not materially and adversely impact our business and results of operations or that we would be able to obtain financing on acceptable terms or at all.
Senior Secured Credit Facility Covenant Compliance
On the last day of each fiscal quarter, the financial covenant in the senior secured credit facility requires us to maintain on a quarterly basis a senior secured leverage ratio not to exceed a maximum amount. Specifically, our total senior secured net debt to trailing twelve month Adjusted EBITDA may not exceed 4.75 to 1.0.
As of December 31, 2011, we were in compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio covenant with a ratio of 4.44 to 1.0. After giving effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, our senior secured leverage ratio covenant would have been 3.87 to 1.0 at December 31, 2011. While the housing market has shown signs of stabilization, there remains substantial uncertainty with respect to the timing and scope of a housing recovery and if a housing recovery is delayed or is weak, we may be subject to additional pressure in maintaining compliance with our senior secured leverage ratio as a result of negative cash flows due to our significant annual interest payments.
To maintain compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio for the twelve-month periods ending March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2012 (or to avoid an event of default thereof), the Company will need to achieve a certain amount of Adjusted EBITDA and/or reduced levels of total senior secured net debt. The factors that will impact the foregoing include: (a) changes in sales volume and/or the price of existing homesales, (b) the ability to continue to implement cost-savings and business productivity enhancement initiatives, (c) increasing new franchise sales, sales associate recruitment and/or brokerage and other acquisitions, (d) obtaining additional equity financing from our parent company, (e) obtaining additional debt or equity financing, or (f) a combination thereof. Factors (b) through (e) may be insufficient to overcome macroeconomic conditions affecting the Company.
If we fail to maintain the senior secured leverage ratio or otherwise default under our senior secured credit facility and if we fail to obtain a waiver from our lenders, then our financial condition, results of operations and business would be materially adversely affected.
We will continue to evaluate potential financing transactions, including refinancing certain tranches of our indebtedness, issuing incremental debt, obtaining incremental letters of credit and extending maturities as well as potential transactions pursuant to which third parties, Apollo or its affiliates may provide financing to us or otherwise engage in transactions to provide liquidity to us. There can be no assurance as to which, if any, of these alternatives we may pursue as the choice of any alternative will depend upon numerous factors such as market conditions, our financial performance and the limitations applicable to such transactions under our existing financing agreements and the consents we may need to obtain under the relevant documents. There also can be no assurance that financing or refinancing will be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. In addition, the conversion of all or a portion of our approximately $2.1 billion in outstanding Convertible Notes into equity at the option of the holders thereof would increase our liquidity, although the holders of the Convertible Notes are not obligated to do so.
Interest Rate Risk
Certain of our borrowings, primarily borrowings under the senior secured credit facility, borrowings under our other bank indebtedness and borrowings under our securitization arrangements, are at variable rates of interest and expose us to interest rate risk. If interest rates increase, our debt service obligations on the variable rate indebtedness would increase even though the amount borrowed remained the same, and our net loss would increase further. We have entered into interest rate swaps, involving the exchange of floating for fixed rate interest payments, to reduce interest rate volatility for a portion of our floating interest rate debt facilities.
Securitization Programs
Funding requirements of our relocation business are primarily satisfied through the issuance of securitization obligations to finance relocation receivables and advances. The Apple Ridge program has restrictive covenants and trigger events, including performance triggers linked to the age and quality of the underlying assets, foreign obligor limits, multicurrency limits, financial reporting requirements, restrictions on mergers and change of control, breach of Realogy’s senior secured leverage ratio under Realogy’s senior secured credit facility if uncured, and cross-defaults to Realogy’s credit agreement, unsecured and secured notes or other material indebtedness. On December 14, 2011, we entered into agreements to amend and extend our existing Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program, which was due to expire in April 2012. The maturity date has been extended until December 2013. The maximum borrowing capacity remained at $400 million.
Contractual Obligations
The following table summarizes our future contractual obligations as of December 31, 2011:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2012 | | 2013 | | 2014 | | 2015 | | 2016 | | Thereafter | | Total |
Non-extended revolving credit facility (a) | $ | — |
| | $ | 78 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 78 |
|
Extended revolving credit facility (a) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 97 |
| | — |
| | 97 |
|
Non-extended term loan facility (b) | 6 |
| | 623 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 629 |
|
Extended term loan facility (c) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,822 |
| | — |
| | 1,822 |
|
Existing First and a Half Lien Notes (d) | | | | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 700 |
| | 700 |
|
Second Lien Loans (d) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 650 |
| | 650 |
|
Other bank indebtedness (e) | 83 |
| | 50 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 133 |
|
10.50% Senior Notes (g) | — |
| | — |
| | 64 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 64 |
|
11.50% Senior Notes (h) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 492 |
| | 492 |
|
11.00%/11.75% Senior Toggle Notes (f) (g) | 11 |
| | — |
| | 41 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 52 |
|
12.00% Senior Notes (h) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 130 |
| | 130 |
|
12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes (g) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 190 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 190 |
|
13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes (h) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 10 |
| | 10 |
|
11.00% Convertible Notes (h) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2,110 |
| | 2,110 |
|
Securitized obligations (i) | 327 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 327 |
|
Operating leases (j) | 136 |
| | 98 |
| | 66 |
| | 46 |
| | 24 |
| | 119 |
| | 489 |
|
Capital leases (including imputed interest) | 6 |
| | 4 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 13 |
|
Purchase commitments (k) | 48 |
| | 22 |
| | 11 |
| | 10 |
| | 9 |
| | 253 |
| | 353 |
|
Total (l) (m) | $ | 617 |
| | $ | 875 |
| | $ | 184 |
| | $ | 247 |
| | $ | 1,952 |
| | $ | 4,464 |
| | $ | 8,339 |
|
_______________ | |
(a) | The Company’s senior secured credit facility provided for a $652 million revolving credit facility, which included a $289 million revolving facility expiring in April 2013 and a $363 million extended revolving facility expiring in April 2016. As a result of the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, all borrowings under the $289 million non-extended revolver were repaid and the facility was terminated (See Update below). Outstanding borrowings under this facility are classified on the balance sheet as current due to the revolving nature of the facility. |
| |
(b) | The Company’s non-extended term loan facility provides for quarterly amortization payments totaling 1% per annum of the principal amount with the balance due on the final maturity date of October 2013. As a result of the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, the non-extended term loan facility was repaid and the facility was terminated (See Update below). |
| |
(c) | The Company’s extended term loan facility matures in October 2016. The interest rate for the variable rate debt of $1,822 million will be determined by the interest rates in effect during each period. There is no scheduled amortization of principal. The Company has entered into derivative instruments to fix the interest rate for $650 million of its $2,759 million variable rate debt, which will result in interest payments of $24 million annually. The interest rate for the remaining portion of the variable rate debt of $2,109 million will be determined by the interest rates in effect during each period. |
| |
(d) | The Company’s Existing First and a Half Lien Notes bear an annual interest rate of 7.875% and the Second Lien Loans bear an annual interest rate of 13.50%. Interest payments are due semi-annually and the annual interest expense for the Existing First and a Half Lien Notes and the Second Lien Loans is approximately $143 million. There is no scheduled amortization with either debt. |
| |
(e) | Consists of revolving credit facilities that are supported by letters of credit issued under the senior secured credit facility, $75 million is due in July 2012, $8 million due in August 2012, and $50 million is due in January 2013. In January 2012, Realogy repaid $25 million of the outstanding borrowings and reduced the capacity of the credit facility due in July 2012 by $25 million. These obligations are classified on the balance sheet as current due to the revolving nature of the facilities. The interest rate for the revolving credit facilities is variable and will be determined by the interest rates in effect during each period. |
| |
(f) | The Company utilized the PIK Interest option to satisfy interest payment obligations for the Senior Toggle Notes which increased the principal amount of the Senior Toggle Notes from October 2008 through April 2011. As a result, the Company is subject to certain interest deduction limitations if the Senior Toggle Notes were treated as AHYDO within the meaning of Section 163(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code. In order to avoid such treatment, the Company will redeem for cash a portion of each Senior Toggle Note then outstanding in April 2012 which is estimated to be approximately $11 million. |
| |
(g) | Annual interest expense for the 10.50% Senior Notes, 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes and Senior Toggle Notes is approximately $36 million. |
| |
(h) | Annual interest expense for the 11.50% Senior Notes, 12.00% Senior Notes, 13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes and the Convertible Notes is approximately $306 million. |
| |
(i) | The Company’s securitization obligations are variable rate debt and the interest payments will be determined by the interest rates in effect during each period. The Apple Ridge agreement expires in December 2013 and the Cartus Financing Limited agreements expire in August 2012 and August 2015. These obligations are classified as current on the balance sheet due to the current classification of the underlying assets that collateralize the obligations. |
| |
(j) | The operating lease amounts included in the above table do not include variable costs such as maintenance, insurance and real estate taxes. |
| |
(k) | Purchase commitments include a minimum licensing fee that the Company is required to pay to Sotheby’s from 2009 through 2054. The annual minimum licensing fee is approximately $2 million. The purchase commitments also include a minimum licensing fee to be paid to Meredith from 2009 through 2057. The annual minimum fee began at $0.5 million in 2009 and will increase to $4 million by 2014 and generally remains the same thereafter. |
| |
(l) | In April 2007, the Company established a standby irrevocable letter of credit for the benefit of Avis Budget Group Inc. in accordance with the Separation and Distribution Agreement. At December 31, 2011, the letter of credit was at $70 million. This letter of credit is not included in the contractual obligations table above. |
| |
(m) | The contractual obligations table does not include the Apollo management fee and does not include other non-current liabilities such as pension liabilities of $60 million and unrecognized tax benefits of $42 million as the Company is not able to estimate the year in which these liabilities could be paid. |
Contractual Obligations Update
On February 2, 2012, Realogy issued $593 million of First Lien Notes with an interest rate of 7.625% and $325 million of New First and a Half Lien Notes with an interest rate of 9.00%. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes will mature on January 15, 2020. The Company used the proceeds from the offering, of approximately $918 million, to: (i) prepay $629 million of its non-extended term loan borrowings under its senior secured credit facility which were due to mature in October 2013, (ii) repay all of the $133 million in outstanding borrowings under the non-extended revolving credit facility which was due to mature in April 2013, and (iii) repay $156 million of the outstanding borrowings under the extended revolving credit facility. In conjunction with the repayments of $289 million described in clauses (ii) and (iii), the Company reduced the commitments under its non-extended revolving credit facility by a like amount, thereby terminating the non-extended revolving credit facility. After giving effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, we estimate that our annual cash interest will increase on a pro forma annualized basis by approximately $46 million from approximately $616 million to $662 million based on our pro forma debt balances as of December 31, 2011 and assuming LIBOR rates as of December 31, 2011.
On February 27, 2012, the Company had $55 million outstanding on the extended revolving credit facility.
Potential Debt Purchases or Sales
Our affiliates have purchased a portion of our indebtedness and we or our affiliates from time to time may sell such indebtedness or purchase additional portions of our indebtedness. Any such future purchases or sales may be made through open market or privately negotiated transactions with third parties or pursuant to one or more tender or exchange offers or otherwise, upon such terms and at such prices as well as with such consideration as we or any such affiliates may determine. Affiliates who own portions of our indebtedness earn interest on a consistent basis with third party owners of such indebtedness.
Critical Accounting Policies
In presenting our financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, we are required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported therein. Several of the estimates and assumptions we are required to make relate to matters that are inherently uncertain as they pertain to future events. However, events that are outside of our control cannot be predicted and, as such, they cannot be contemplated in evaluating such estimates and assumptions. If there is a significant unfavorable change to current conditions, it could result in a material adverse impact to our results of operations, financial position and liquidity. We believe that the estimates and assumptions we used when preparing our financial statements were the most appropriate at that time. Presented below are those accounting policies that we believe require subjective and complex judgments that could potentially affect reported results. However, the majority of our businesses operate in environments where we are paid a fee for a service performed, and therefore the results of the majority of our recurring operations are recorded in our financial statements using accounting policies that are not particularly subjective, nor complex.
Allowance for doubtful accounts
We estimate the allowance necessary to provide for uncollectible accounts receivable. The estimate is based on historical experience, combined with a review of current developments, and includes specific accounts for which payment has become unlikely. The process by which we calculate the allowance begins in the individual business units where specific problem accounts are identified and reserved and an additional reserve is generally recorded driven by the age profile of the receivables. Our allowance for doubtful accounts was $64 million and $67 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Impairment of goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets
With regard to the goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets recorded in connection with business combinations, we annually, or more frequently if circumstances indicate impairment may have occurred, analyze their carrying values to determine if an impairment exists. In performing this analysis, we are required to make an assessment of fair value for our goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets. We determine the fair value of our reporting units utilizing our best estimate of future revenues, operating expenses, cash flows, market and general economic conditions as well as assumptions that we believe marketplace participants would utilize including discount rates, cost of capital, trademark royalty rates, and long term growth rates. The trademark royalty rate was determined by reviewing similar trademark agreements with third parties. Although we believe our assumptions are reasonable, actual results may vary significantly. A change in these underlying assumptions could cause a change in the results of the tests and, as such, could cause the fair value to be less than the respective carrying amount. In such an event, we would be required to record a charge, which would impact earnings.
The aggregate carrying value of our goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets was $3,299 million and $742 million, respectively, at December 31, 2011. It is difficult to quantify the impact of an adverse change in financial results and related cash flows, as certain changes may be isolated to one of our four reporting units or spread across our entire organization. Based upon the impairment analysis performed in the fourth quarter of 2011, there was no impairment for 2011. Management did evaluate the effect of lowering the estimated fair value for each of the reporting units by 10% and determined that no impairment of goodwill would have been recognized under this evaluation.
Income taxes
We recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the differences between the financial statement carrying amounts and the tax bases of assets and liabilities. We regularly review our deferred tax balances to assess their potential realization and establish a valuation allowance for amounts that we believe will not be ultimately realized. In performing this review, we make estimates and assumptions regarding projected future taxable income, the expected timing of the reversals of existing temporary differences and the identification of tax planning strategies. A change in these assumptions could cause an increase or decrease to our valuation allowance resulting in an increase or decrease in our effective tax rate, which could materially impact our results of operations.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In September 2011, the FASB amended the guidance on testing for goodwill impairment that allows an entity to elect to qualitatively assess whether it is necessary to perform the current two-step goodwill impairment test. If the qualitative assessment determines that it is not more-likely-than-not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step test is unnecessary. If the entity elects to bypass the qualitative assessment for any reporting unit and proceed directly to Step One of the test and validate the conclusion by measuring fair value, it can resume performing the qualitative assessment in any subsequent period. The amendments are effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company will consider utilizing the new qualitative analysis for its goodwill impairment test to be performed in the fourth quarter of 2012.
In May 2011, the FASB amended the guidance on Fair Value Measurement that result in common measurement of fair value and disclosure requirements between U.S. GAAP and the International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). The amendments mainly change the wording used to describe many of the requirements in U.S. GAAP for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements. The amendments are effective prospectively for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company adopted the amendments on January 1, 2012 and the adoption did not have a significant impact on the consolidated financial statements.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
See “Index to Financial Statements” on page F-1.
PART III
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
Compensation Discussion and Analysis (all amounts in this section are in actual dollars unless otherwise noted)
Company Background. Realogy became an independent, publicly traded company on the New York Stock Exchange on August 1, 2006 following its separation from Cendant pursuant to its plan of separation. In December 2006, Realogy entered into a merger agreement with affiliates of Apollo and the Merger was consummated on April 10, 2007. Shortly prior to the consummation of the Merger, Apollo, principally through the Holdings Board, whose members then consisted of Apollo’s representatives, Messrs. Marc Becker and M. Ali Rashid, negotiated employment agreements and other arrangements with our named executive officers. (Mr. Silverman, our Chief Executive Officer at the effective time of the Merger, did not enter into an employment agreement.)
The named executive officers who entered into these employment agreements were Richard A. Smith, our President, and, effective November 13, 2007, our Chief Executive Officer; Anthony E. Hull, our Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer; Kevin J. Kelleher, President and Chief Executive Officer of Cartus; Alexander E. Perriello, III, President and Chief Executive Officer of Realogy Franchise Group; and Bruce Zipf, President and Chief Executive Officer of NRT LLC. The Realogy Board has determined that these officers are named executive officers based upon their duties and responsibilities insofar as they are our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer, and our three most highly compensated executive officers other than our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer. This Compensation Discussion and Analysis describes, among other things, the compensation objectives and the elements of our executive compensation program as embodied by the employment agreements, which remain the core of our executive compensation program.
In February 2008, the Holdings Board established the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee has the power and authority to oversee the compensation policies and programs of Holdings and Realogy and makes all compensation related decisions relating to our named executive officers based upon recommendations from our Chief Executive Officer.
During the fourth quarter of 2010 and in 2011, the basic elements of compensation for our Chief Executive Officer and our other named executive officers were modified in an effort to add incentives to our named executive officers to retain their services, through the following:
| |
• | an employee option exchange offer consummated in November 2010; |
| |
• | the adoption of a 2011-2012 multi-year retention program; |
| |
• | the adoption of a phantom value plan; and |
| |
• | the amendment of employment agreements with each of our named executive officers other than our Chief Executive Officer. |
Compensation Philosophy and Objectives. Our primary objective with respect to executive compensation is to design and implement compensation policies and programs that efficiently and effectively provide incentives to, and motivate, officers and key employees to increase their efforts towards creating and maximizing stockholder value. The Compensation Committee evaluates both performance and compensation to ensure that, subject to Company financial constraints, we maintain our ability to attract and retain superior employees in key positions and that compensation to key employees remains competitive relative to the compensation paid by similar sized companies. We do not rely on peer compensation information in the residential real estate services industry as most of these companies are privately held and therefore it is difficult for us to obtain this information. We do, however, rely on executive compensation survey data on market comparables. The market comparables have been based principally on service oriented companies of similar revenue and employee size. The Compensation Committee believes executive compensation packages provided by us to our executives, including our named executive officers, should include both cash and stock-based compensation that reward performance as measured against established goals and/or an increase in the value of the Company. There is no formulaic approach using the executive compensation survey data on market comparables in determining the amount of total compensation to each named executive officer. Each element of compensation is determined on a subjective basis using various factors at the Compensation Committee’s sole discretion. The Compensation Committee has not engaged any compensation consultants to participate in the determination or recommendation of the amount or form of these executive compensation packages.
In negotiating the initial employment agreements and arrangements with our named executive officers in 2007, Apollo (acting through the Holdings Board) placed significant emphasis on aligning management’s interests with those of Apollo. Our named executive officers made significant equity investments in Common Stock upon consummation of the Merger and received equity awards that included performance vesting options that would vest upon Apollo and its co-investors receiving reasonable rates of return on its invested capital in Holdings. Under the 2007 employment agreements, base salary and cash-based incentive compensation remained substantially unchanged post-Merger from the arrangements that had been put in place prior to consummation of the Merger. Since 2007, the Compensation Committee has placed greater emphasis on retention plans and eliminated or reduced certain perquisites and benefits given the lengthy and prolonged downturn in the residential housing market and the overall smaller size of Realogy compared to Cendant as a whole. During 2011, the Compensation Committee increased the base salaries of the named executive officers other than the Chief Executive Officer in connection with the amendment of their employment agreements as discussed in further detail below.
Role of Executive Officers in Compensation Decisions. Mr. Richard Smith, our President and Chief Executive Officer, periodically reviews the performance of each of our named executive officers (other than his own performance), and Mr. Smith’s performance is periodically reviewed by the Compensation Committee. The conclusions reached and recommendations based upon these reviews, including with respect to salary adjustment and annual incentive award target and actual payout amounts, are presented to the Compensation Committee, which has the discretion to modify any recommended adjustments or awards to our executives. The Compensation Committee has final approval over all compensation decisions for our named executive officers, including approval of recommendations regarding cash and equity awards to all of our officers. The Chief Administrative Officer participates in the data analysis process.
Setting Executive Compensation. Based on the foregoing objectives, the Holdings Board structured our annual and long-term incentive cash and stock-based executive compensation programs to motivate our executives to achieve the business goals set by us and to reward our executives for achieving these goals.
During the fourth quarter of 2010 and in 2011, the Compensation Committee structured the executive compensation payable to our named executive officers in a manner to provide them with increased incentives:
| |
• | an employee option exchange offer consummated in November 2010; |
| |
• | the adoption of a 2011-2012 multi-year retention program that provides for enhanced retention payments from prior retention programs; |
| |
• | the adoption of a phantom value plan in January 2011; and |
| |
• | the amendment of employment agreements with each of our named executive officers other than our Chief Executive Officer, which provide for (1) an extended term ending on April 10, 2015, and (2) an annual base salary increase, effective April 1, 2011, and, in the case of Messrs. Hull, Kelleher and Zipf, another annual base salary increase, effective January 1, 2012. |
Executive Compensation Elements. The principal components of compensation for our named executive officers are: base salary; bonus; retention plans; phantom value plans; management stock option awards; management equity investments; management restricted stock awards; and other benefits and perquisites.
Base Salary. We provide our named executive officers and other employees with base salary to compensate them for services rendered during the fiscal year. Base salary ranges for our named executive officers are determined for each executive based on his or her position, scope of responsibility and contribution to our earnings. The initial base salary for our named executive officers was established in their employment agreements entered into upon consummation of the Merger and generally equaled the base salary that the named executive officers had been paid at the time of Realogy’s separation from Cendant in 2006.
Salary levels are generally reviewed annually as part of our performance review process as well as upon a promotion or other material change in job responsibility. Merit based increases to salaries of the executives, including our named executive officers, are based on the Compensation Committee’s assessment of individual performance taking into account recommendations from Mr. Smith. In reviewing base salaries for executives, the Compensation Committee considers an internal review of the executive’s compensation, individually and relative to other officers with a primary emphasis on each executive's ability to contribute to the Company's financial and strategic goals. The Compensation Committee also considers the individual sustained performance of the executive over a period of time as well as the expected future contributions, outside survey data and analysis on market comparables, and the extent to which the proposed overall operating budget for the upcoming year (which is approved by the Board) contemplates salary increases. Any base salary adjustment is generally made by the Compensation Committee subjectively based upon the foregoing and does not
specifically weight any one factor in setting base salaries. Due to the lengthy and prolonged downturn in the real estate market, no changes to the base salaries of the named executive officers were made from 2008 to March 31, 2011.
In April 2011, the Compensation Committee, acting on the recommendation of the Chief Executive Officer, approved base salary adjustments that were effective on April 1, 2011 for each of the named executive officers, with the exception of the Chief Executive Officer, and for Messrs. Hull, Zipf, and Kelleher a second adjustment was approved that was effective on January 1, 2012. The Compensation Committee determined that the recommended based salary adjustments were warranted after consideration of the above factors and recognizing that the named executive officers' base salaries had not changed since 2007.
The April 1, 2011 and the January 1, 2012 base salary adjustments are detailed below:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Executive | Previous Base Salary | | April 1, 2011 Base Salary | | January 1, 2012 Base Salary | | Total Changes |
| Base Salary | $ Change | % Change | | Base Salary | $ Change | % Change | | $ Change | % Change |
Anthony E. Hull | $ | 525,000 |
| | $ | 575,000 |
| $ | 50,000 |
| 9.5 | % | | $ | 600,000 |
| $ | 25,000 |
| 4.3 | % | | $ | 75,000 |
| 14.3 | % |
Bruce G. Zipf | $ | 520,000 |
| | $ | 560,000 |
| $ | 40,000 |
| 7.7 | % | | $ | 575,000 |
| $ | 15,000 |
| 2.7 | % | | $ | 55,000 |
| 10.6 | % |
Alexander E. Perriello, III | $ | 520,000 |
| | $ | 550,000 |
| $ | 30,000 |
| 5.8 | % | | $ | 550,000 |
| $ | — |
| — | % | | $ | 30,000 |
| 5.8 | % |
Kevin J. Kelleher | $ | 416,000 |
| | $ | 450,000 |
| $ | 34,000 |
| 8.2 | % | | $ | 475,000 |
| $ | 25,000 |
| 5.6 | % | | $ | 59,000 |
| 14.2 | % |
Bonus. Our named executive officers generally participate in an annual incentive compensation program (“Bonus Program”) with performance objectives established by the Compensation Committee and communicated to our named executive officers generally within 90 days following the beginning of the calendar year. Under their respective employment agreements, the target annual bonus payable to our named executive officers is 100% of annual base salary, or, in Mr. Smith’s case, given his overall greater responsibilities for the performance of the Company, 200% of annual base salary.
In November 2010, in conjunction with the adoption of the 2011-2012 Multi-Year Retention Plan, the Compensation Committee terminated the 2010 Bonus Plan covering the named executive officers or other key personnel principally within its Corporate Services unit and the corporate offices of Realogy’s four business units. In light of the existence of the 2011-2012 Multi-Year Retention Plan, the Compensation Committee declined to adopt a 2011 Bonus Plan.
On February 27, 2012, the Compensation Committee approved the annual incentive structure for 2012 under the 2012 Realogy Executive Incentive Plan (the “2012 Incentive Plan”) applicable to the Chief Executive Officer, the other named executive officers and three other executive officers that report to the Chief Executive Officer (collectively, the "Executive Leadership Committee"). The performance criteria under the 2012 Incentive Plan are based on consolidated and business unit EBITDA or earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (as that term is defined in the 2012 Incentive Plan). The incentive opportunity for Mr. Smith and Mr. Hull is based upon consolidated EBITDA results. The incentive opportunity for our other named executive officers (Messrs. Kelleher, Perriello and Zipf) is based upon our consolidated EBITDA results (weighted 50%) and EBITDA results of their respective business units (weighted 50%). Pre-established EBITDA performance levels have been set that, if achieved, would produce incentive payouts under the 2012 Incentive Plan at 25%, 100%, 125% or 150% of the target annual bonus amounts, respectively. The minimum EBITDA performance level at which there would be a payout equal to 25% of an Executive Leadership Committee member's target bonus amount has been set at approximately 90% of consolidated target EBITDA and, with respect to the members of the Executive Leadership Committee that are Chief Executive Officers of the four business units, a percentage ranging from approximately 90% to 94% of their respective consolidated business unit target EBITDA. The maximum EBITDA performance level at which there would be a payout equal to 150% of an Executive Leadership Committee member's target bonus amount has been set at approximately 115% of consolidated target EBITDA and, with respect to the members of the Executive Leadership Committee that are Chief Executive Officers of the four business units, a percentage ranging from approximately 111% to 116% of their respective consolidated business unit target EBITDA. Where performance levels fall between minimum and target or between target and maximum levels, incentive payments are determined by linear interpolation. Our consolidated EBITDA threshold has to be achieved before any named executive officer may qualify for an incentive payment.
Any amount payable under the 2012 Incentive Plan will be paid in shares of Class A Common Stock of Holdings and cash. At payouts below target, the cash portion will represent 30% of the incentive payment and at or above target, the cash portion will increase to 50%, though in the case of Mr. Smith, he will receive only shares of Class A Common Stock for any
payout below target. The number of shares received will be based upon the fair market value of the Class A Common Stock as of January 1, 2013 by dividing (1) the dollar amount of a participant's incentive payment that is payable in shares by (2) the fair market value of the shares on January 1, 2013, as determined by the Compensation Committee. If target EBITDA is achieved or exceeded, the number of shares to be issued shall be the number of shares determined by the formula in the preceding sentence, multiplied by 1.20. If an incentive payment is payable, members of the Executive Leadership Committee may elect to receive additional shares (calculated on the same basis) in lieu of all or a portion of the cash incentive payment that would otherwise be payable to him or her.
Mr. Smith is entitled to an additional annual bonus, the after-tax proceeds of which are required to be used to purchase the annual premium on an existing life insurance policy. This benefit is provided to Mr. Smith as the replacement of a benefit previously provided to him by Cendant. Mr. Smith waived his contractual right to receive this bonus with respect to the bonuses payable in January 2009 and 2010 in order to reduce Company expenses, but did receive this bonus in January 2011 in the amount of $97,000.
Retention Plan. In November 2010, the Compensation Committee approved the 2011-2012 Multi-Year Retention Plan. The 2011-2012 Multi-Year Retention Plan provides for a retention payment equal to 200% of each of the named executive officer’s target annual bonus, half payable in two installments in each of 2011 and 2012, subject to the executive’s continued employment with Realogy. The retention amount payable annually under the 2011-2012 Multi-Year Retention Plan exceeds the amounts that were payable to the named executive officers under previous plans, under which the named executive officers received 50% of their target annual bonus in 2009 and 80% of their target annual bonus in 2010. (While Mr. Smith is a participant in the 2011-2012 Multi-Year Retention Plan, he elected not to participate in prior retention plans.) The Compensation Committee took such action to provide greater retention value to Realogy with respect to such key personnel, particularly given the continuing uncertainty regarding company performance over the near term, which is largely influenced by macro-economic factors beyond management’s control, including continuing high unemployment, uncertainty about housing values, and the inability of the 2009 and 2010 federal homebuyer tax credits to fuel a sustained housing recovery. In December 2011, the Compensation Committee amended the 2011-2012 Multi-Year Retention Plan to modify the 2012 payment schedule (which originally provided for 50% of a named executive officer's 2012 retention payment in each of April and October 2012), such that the named executive officers will receive 60% of their 2012 retention amount in July 2012 and the remaining 40% in October 2012, again subject to their continued employment with Realogy. The plan had previously provided for equal installments in April and October. The Compensation Committee made the change to the 2012 payment schedule in order to better align the Company’s significant fixed and capital expenditures with its strongest periods of cash flow generation—historically the second and third quarters of the year.
Management Equity Investments. Pursuant to individual subscription agreements dated April 20, 2007, the named executive officers and certain other members of management made equity investments in Holdings through the purchase of Common Stock. Our named executive officers purchased an aggregate of 62,000 shares at $250.00 per share for an aggregate investment of $15,500,000.
The amount of equity originally purchased was made through a cash investment, the contribution of shares of Realogy common stock in lieu of receiving the Merger consideration, or a combination thereof. The named executive officers who made cash investments utilized all or substantially all of the net after-tax proceeds they received as Merger consideration for the Realogy options, restricted stock units and stock settled stock appreciation rights they held immediately prior to the Merger. In addition, Mr. Smith purchased shares of Holdings common stock with the after-tax proceeds of the one-time $5 million investment bonus paid to him upon consummation of the Merger as partial consideration for his retention following the Merger. At the time of the Merger, Mr. Smith was President and Chief Operating Officer but pursuant to an existing succession plan, was slated to, and did become, President and Chief Executive Officer in November 2007. All equity securities in Holdings purchased by the executives are subject to restrictions on transfer, repurchase rights and other limitations set forth in a securityholders’ agreement. See “Item 13—Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.”
Management Stock Option and Restricted Stock Awards. The Holdings Board approved our equity incentive program, including its design and the value of awards granted to our officers and key employees. Equity awards were made to our named executive officers on April 10, 2007, upon consummation of the Merger. Our named executive officers were awarded options to purchase an aggregate of 232,500 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $250.00 per share and received restricted stock awards for an aggregate of 15,000 shares of Common Stock at an ascribed initial value of $250.00 per share. The number of options awarded to each of the named executive officers (and other executive officers) was based upon a multiplier of 3.75 times the number of shares purchased in 2007. One half of the restricted stock awards vested in October 2008 and the balance vested in April 2010.
The number of shares of restricted stock awarded to each of the named executive officers was based upon organizational complexity and contribution to the Company’s results. Given their time vesting provisions, the restricted stock awards were viewed as a retention vehicle as well as a means of providing incentive compensation that could be achieved in the mid-term—over the 18 to 36 month vesting period.
The 2007 initial equity investments made by, and the option grants and restricted stock awards made to, the named executive officers were as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Name | Number of Shares of Holdings Common Stock Purchased (#) | | Aggregate Equity Investment ($) | | Number of Options to Purchase Shares of Holdings Common Stock (#) | | Number of Shares of Restricted Stock (#) (1) |
Richard A. Smith | 33,200 |
| | $ | 8,300,000 |
| | 124,500 |
| | 4,000 |
|
Anthony E. Hull | 8,000 |
| | $ | 2,000,000 |
| | 30,000 |
| | 4,000 |
|
Kevin J. Kelleher | 6,400 |
| | $ | 1,600,000 |
| | 24,000 |
| | 1,000 |
|
Alexander E. Perriello, III | 8,000 |
| | $ | 2,000,000 |
| | 30,000 |
| | 2,000 |
|
Bruce Zipf | 6,400 |
| | $ | 1,600,000 |
| | 24,000 |
| | 4,000 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | After giving effect to the named executive officers that elected to forfeit certain shares to pay minimum withholding taxes due upon vesting, the named executive officers received the following net amount of shares upon vesting: Mr. Smith, 3,281 shares; Mr. Hull, 3,281 shares; Mr. Kelleher, 843 shares; Mr. Perriello, 1,282 shares; and Mr. Zipf, 2,562 shares. |
Plans and Programs to Address Steep Decline in Equity Value Since 2007. During the fourth quarter of 2010 and early 2011, the Compensation Committee and the Realogy and Holdings Boards realized that the value of the Common Stock was significantly below the $250.00 price at which the named executive officers had purchased shares in 2007, the $250.00 per share exercise price of the options granted to them in 2007 and the $250.00 per share implied grant date value of the restricted stock granted to them in 2007. In connection with that review, the Compensation Committee and Holdings Board approved an employee option exchange offer, which commenced on October 8, 2010, and concluded on November 8, 2010 and the Realogy Board approved the Realogy Corporation Phantom Value Plan in January 2011 upon consummation of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions described elsewhere in this Annual Report. As describe more fully below, the phantom value plan and option exchange program seek to provide the Executive Leadership Committee with a renewed incentive to generate value in the Company.
Phantom Value Plan. On January 5, 2011, Realogy issued RCIV Holdings (Luxembourg) S.a.r.l., an affiliate of Apollo (“RCIV”), Convertible Notes in the aggregate principal amount of $1,338,190,220 (the “Initial RCIV Notes”) as part of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions described elsewhere in this Annual Report. On January 5, 2011, the Board of Directors of Realogy approved the Realogy Corporation Phantom Value Plan (the “Phantom Value Plan”), and made initial grants thereunder (the “Incentive Awards”) to the Executive Leadership Committee, in an effort to address in part the fact that the market value of the shares initially purchased by the participants in 2007 and the shares granted in the form of a restricted stock grant in 2007 had lost significant value. The Phantom Value Plan provides the Executive Leadership Committee with the opportunity to receive compensation based upon the Company’s success and the cash received by RCIV upon the discharge or third-party sale of not less than or $267,638,044 of the aggregate principal amount of the Initial RCIV Notes (or on any non-cash consideration into which the Initial RCIV Notes may have been exchanged or converted such as the shares of Class A Common Stock of Holdings issuable upon conversion of the Initial RCIV Notes).
The amount of each Incentive Award granted to each member of the Executive Leadership Committee was determined by the sum of (1) the shares of Holdings purchased by the executive at $250 per share in April 2007 and (2) the value of the executive officer's initial restricted stock grant in April 2007, net of shares forfeited to pay minimum withholding taxes due upon vesting. On the foregoing basis, the Board of Directors of Realogy made initial grants of Incentive Awards of approximately $21.8 million to the Executive Leadership Committee, of which an aggregate of approximately $18.3 million was granted to the named executive officers, as follows:
|
| | | |
Name | Incentive Award |
Richard A. Smith | $ | 9,120,250 |
|
Anthony E. Hull | $ | 2,820,250 |
|
Kevin J. Kelleher | $ | 1,810,690 |
|
Alexander E. Perriello, III | $ | 2,320,250 |
|
Bruce Zipf | $ | 2,240,500 |
|
Each participant is eligible to receive a payment with respect to his or her Incentive Award at such time and from time to time that RCIV receives cash upon the discharge or third-party sale of not less than or $267,638,044 of the aggregate principal amount of the Initial RCIV Notes, (or on any non-cash consideration into which the Initial RCIV Notes may have been exchanged or converted such as the shares of Class A Common Stock of Holdings issuable upon conversion of the Initial RCIV Notes). A payment would be an amount which bears the same ratio to the dollar amount of the Incentive Award as (i) the aggregate amount of cash received by RCIV at such time upon discharge or sale of all or a portion of the principal amount of the Initial RCIV Notes (or upon the discharge, sale, exchange or transfer of any non-cash consideration into which the Initial RCIV Notes may have been exchanged or converted) bears to (ii) $1,338,190,220, representing the aggregate principal amount of the Initial RCIV Notes on the date of issuance.
In the event that a payment is to be made with respect to an Incentive Award in conjunction with or subsequent to a qualified public offering of common stock of Realogy or its direct or indirect parent company, a participant may elect to receive stock in lieu of the cash payment in a number of unrestricted shares of common stock with a fair market value, as determined in good faith by the Compensation Committee, equal to the dollar amount then due on such Incentive Award, plus a number of restricted shares of such common stock with a fair market value, as determined in good faith by the Compensation Committee, equal to the amount then due multiplied by 0.15. The restricted shares of common stock will vest, based on continued employment, on the first anniversary of issuance. In addition, Incentive Awards will be subject to acceleration and payment upon a change of control as specified in the Phantom Value Plan.
On each date RCIV receives cash interest on the Initial RCIV Notes, participants may be granted stock options under the Stock Incentive Plan with an aggregate value (determined on a Black-Scholes basis) equal to an amount which bears the same ratio to the aggregate dollar amount of the executive's Incentive Award as (i) the aggregate amount of cash interest received by RCIV on such date bears to (ii) $1,338,190,220, which represents the aggregate principal amount of the Initial RCIV Notes on the date of issuance. The stock option grants to Realogy’s Chief Executive Officer, however, were limited to 50% of the foregoing stock option amount for the interest payment dates in April and October 2011, but that restriction in the Phantom Value Plan has been eliminated for future option grants by a November 2011 amendment to the Phantom Value Plan. Generally, each grant of stock options will have a three year vesting schedule, subject to the executive’s continued employment, and vested stock options will become exercisable one year following a qualified public offering. The stock options will have a term of 7.5 years.
In April and October 2011, stock options were granted to the Executive Leadership Committee in accordance with the terms of the Phantom Value Plan as RCIV received cash interest on the Initial RCIV Notes on such dates.
Incentive Awards are immediately cancelable and forfeitable in the event of the termination of the grantee's employment for any reason. The Incentive Awards also terminate 10 years following the date of grant. In the event of a change in control, Incentive Awards will be subject to acceleration and payment only if RCIV receives consideration with respect to the Initial RCIV Notes in the change in control transaction.
Option Exchange Program. The option exchange program launched in October 2010 offered our eligible employees the opportunity to exchange all of their respective outstanding options to purchase Common Stock for an equal number of new stock options with different terms to be issued following the completion of the exchange offer. Each of the outstanding original options had an exercise price per share of $250.00, substantially all of which were granted in 2007 in connection
with Apollo’s acquisition of Realogy. On November 9, 2010, 406,360 original options were tendered and exchanged for an equal number of new options, including all 277,500 original options tendered by the Executive Leadership Committee.
The new options were issued under the Holdings Stock Incentive Plan (as amended and restated as of November 9, 2010) and have the same terms as the original options, except as follows: (i) the exercise price of the new options (other than those issued to the members of the Executive Leadership Committee) is $20.75 per share, representing the fair market value per share of Common Stock as determined by its Compensation Committee as of the date of grant of the new options; (ii) the exercise price of 70% of the new options issued to the members of the Executive Leadership Committee is $20.75 per share, and the exercise price of the remaining 30% of the new options granted to the members of the Executive Leadership Committee is $137.50 per share; (iii) each new option expires on the tenth (10th) anniversary of the new option grant date (unless it expires earlier in accordance with its terms); and (iv) each new option vests as to twenty-five percent (25%) of the total shares subject to the new option on each of the first (4) anniversaries of July 1, 2010. Each member of the Executive Leadership Committee tendered all of their original 2007 options for new options. For more information on the Holdings Stock Incentive Plan, see “Outstanding Equity Awards at 2011 Fiscal Year End”.
Neither the Holdings Board nor the Compensation Committee has adopted any formal policy regarding the timing of any future equity awards.
Other Benefits and Perquisite Programs. Our executive officers, including our named executive officers, may participate in our 401(k) plan. The plan currently provides for a Company matching contribution of 25% of amounts contributed by the officer, subject to a maximum of 6% of eligible compensation. Mr. Kelleher is our only executive officer that participates in a defined benefit pension plan (future accruals of benefits were frozen on October 31, 1999), and this participation relates to his former service with PHH.
The Compensation Committee adopted a policy in December 2006 that limited use of the previous corporate-owned aircraft or our current fractional aircraft ownership (only Mr. Smith has access, subject to availability, for personal use and business use is limited to executive officers and subject to further limitations) and management adopted a policy that limits first-class air travel for our employees. During 2011, Mr. Smith reimbursed the Company for all variable costs associated with the personal use of the aircraft in which we have a fractional ownership interest.
Severance Pay and Benefits upon Termination of Employment under Certain Circumstances. The employment agreements entered into with our named executive officers at the effective time of the Merger provide for severance pay and benefits under certain circumstances. The level of the severance pay and benefits is substantially consistent with the level of severance pay and benefits that those named executive officers were entitled to under the agreements they had with Realogy following its separation from Cendant but prior to the consummation of the Merger.
Under our employment agreements with our named executive officers, the severance pay is equal to a multiple of the sum of his or her annual base salary and target bonus, along with the continuation of welfare benefits. Severance pay is payable upon a termination without cause by the Company or a termination for good reason by the executive. The severance multiple for Mr. Smith, as our Chief Executive Officer, is 300%, for Mr. Hull, as our Chief Financial Officer, 200% and for the balance of the named executive officers, 100% (though in the case of such a termination of employment within 12 months following Sale of the Company (as defined in their employment agreements), their multiple is 200%. The higher multiples of base salary and target bonus payable to Messrs. Smith and Hull are based upon Mr. Smith’s overall greater responsibilities for our performance and Mr. Hull’s significant responsibilities as our Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Smith is our only officer who has tax reimbursement protection for “golden parachute excise taxes,” subject to a cutback of up to 10%—a benefit he had under his employment agreement that he entered into at the time of our separation from Cendant.
The agreements also provide for severance pay of 100% of annual base salary and the continuation of welfare benefits to each named executive officer in the event his employment is terminated by reason of death or disability. For more information on the employment agreements, see “Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control.”
The Compensation Committee believes the severance pay and benefits payable to our named executive officers under the foregoing circumstances aid in the attraction and retention of these executives as a competitive practice and is balanced by the inclusion of restrictive covenants (such as non-compete provisions) to protect the value of Realogy and Holdings following a termination of an executive’s employment without cause or by the employee for good reason. In addition, we believe the provision of these contractual benefits will keep the executives focused on the operation and management of the business. As set forth above, the enhanced severance pay and benefits payable to Messrs. Kelleher, Perriello and Zipf in the
event of a termination of employment under certain circumstances within twelve months of a Sale of the Company are substantially consistent with the contractual rights they had prior to the Merger.
Forfeiture of Awards in the event of Financial Restatement. The Company has not adopted a policy with respect to the forfeiture of equity incentive awards or bonuses in the event of a restatement of financial results, though each of the employment agreements with the named executive officers includes, within the definition of termination for “cause”, an executive purposefully or negligently making (or being found to have made) a false certification to the Company pertaining to its financial statements.
Compensation Committee Report
The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K with management and, based on such review and discussions, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Realogy Board (and Holdings Board) that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Annual Report.
|
|
DOMUS HOLDINGS CORP. COMPENSATION COMMITTEE |
|
Marc E. Becker, Chair M. Ali Rashid |
Summary Compensation Table
The following table sets forth the compensation we provided in 2011, 2010 and 2009 to our named executive officers:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Name and Principal Position | Year | | Salary ($) (1) | | Bonus ($) (2) | | Stock Option and Stock Appreciation Rights Awards ($) (3) | | Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($) (4) | | Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings ($) (5) | | All Other Compensation ($) | | Total ($) |
Richard A. Smith | 2011 | | 1,000,000 |
| | 97,000 |
| | — |
| | 2,000,000 |
| | — |
| | 2,000 |
| | 3,099,000 |
|
Chief Executive Officer and President | 2010 | | 1,000,000 |
| | — |
| | 1,005,338 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,750 |
| | 2,007,088 |
|
2009 | | 1,000,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,858 |
| | 1,001,858 |
|
Anthony E. Hull | 2011 | | 562,500 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 525,000 |
| | — |
| | 3,675 |
| | 1,091,175 |
|
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer And Treasurer | 2010 | | 525,000 |
| | — |
| | 242,250 |
| | 420,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,187,250 |
|
2009 | | 525,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 262,500 |
| | — |
| | 44,817 |
| | 832,317 |
|
Kevin J. Kelleher | 2011 | | 441,500 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 416,000 |
| | 80,409 |
| | — |
| | 937,909 |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer of Cartus Corporation | 2010 | | 416,000 |
| | — |
| | 193,800 |
| | 332,800 |
| | 44,784 |
| | — |
| | 987,384 |
|
2009 | | 416,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 208,000 |
| | 47,763 |
| | 39,938 |
| | 711,701 |
|
Alexander E. Perriello, III | 2011 | | 542,500 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 520,000 |
| | — |
| | 2,525 |
| | 1,065,025 |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer, Realogy Franchise Group | 2010 | | 520,000 |
| | — |
| | 242,250 |
| | 416,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,178,250 |
|
2009 | | 520,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 260,000 |
| | — |
| | 40,367 |
| | 820,367 |
|
Bruce Zipf | 2011 | | 550,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 520,000 |
| | — |
| | 3,558 |
| | 1,073,558 |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer, NRT | 2010 | | 520,000 |
| | — |
| | 193,800 |
| | 416,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,129,800 |
|
2009 | | 520,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 39,443 |
| | 819,443 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | The following are the annual rates of base salary paid to each of the named executive officers as of December 31, 2011: Mr. Smith, $1,000,000; Mr. Hull, $575,000; Mr. Kelleher, $450,000; Mr. Perriello, $550,000; and Mr. Zipf, $560,000. Effective January 1, 2012, the annual base salaries of Messrs. Hull, Kelleher and Zipf were increased to $600,000, $475,000 and $575,000, respectively. |
| |
(2) | In January 2011, the Compensation Committee approved an annual bonus of $97,000 payable to Mr. Smith pursuant to the terms of his employment agreement, the after-tax proceeds of which are required to be used to purchase the annual premium on an existing life insurance policy. |
| |
(3) | Each named executive officer received grants of Holdings non-qualified stock options in April and October 2011 pursuant to the terms of the Phantom Value Plan. These options vest as to one-third of the total shares subject to the options on each of the first three (3) anniversaries of the date of grant but are not exercisable until one year following a qualified public offering. We have not reported the grant date fair value in the table as the likelihood of the options being exercised is not yet probable as a qualified public offering has not occurred. Assuming the highest level of performance conditions are probable (i.e., a qualified public offering has occurred), the total grant date fair value of these options in accordance with FASB guidance on stock-based compensation would be as follows (with the assumptions used in determining such value being described in Note 12, “Stock-Based Compensation” to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report): |
|
| | | | | | | |
Name | Grant Date Fair Value as of April 15, 2011 Option Grant | | Grant Date Fair Value as of October 17, 2011 Option Grant |
Richard A. Smith | $ | 85,999 |
| | $ | 148,105 |
|
Anthony E. Hull | $ | 53,188 |
| | $ | 91,597 |
|
Kevin J. Kelleher | $ | 34,148 |
| | $ | 58,809 |
|
Alexander E. Perriello, III | $ | 43,758 |
| | $ | 75,358 |
|
Bruce Zipf | $ | 42,254 |
| | $ | 72,768 |
|
| |
(4) | Amounts for 2011 represent aggregate amount paid to the named executive officers under the Realogy 2011-2012 Multi-Year Retention Plan. |
| |
(5) | None of our named executive officers (other than Mr. Kelleher) is a participant in any defined benefit pension arrangement. The amounts in this column with respect to 2011 reflect the aggregate change in the actuarial present value of the accumulated benefit under the Realogy Pension Plan from December 31, 2010 to December 31, 2011. See “Realogy Pension Benefits” for additional information regarding the benefits accrued for Mr. Kelleher. |
Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table for Fiscal Year 2011
Each of the named executive officers received grants in 2011 under the following non-equity incentive and stock-based compensation plans. Each of the named executive officers:
| |
• | received Incentive Awards under the Realogy Phantom Value Plan in January 2011; and |
| |
• | received stock options in April and October 2011 under the Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Incentive Plan as provided by the Realogy Phantom Value Plan. |
Grants of Plan-Based Awards in Fiscal Year 2011
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Estimated Future Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards | | Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards | | Exercise or Base Price of Options Awards ($/Sh) | | Grant Date Fair Value of Stock Options (4) |
Name | Grant Date | | Threshold ($) (2) | | Target ($) (1) | | Maximum ($) (2) | | Threshold (#) | | Target (#)(3) | | Maximum (#) | |
Richard A. Smith | 1/5/2011 | | — |
| | 9,120,250 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | |
| 4/15/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7,479 |
| | — |
| | 22.25 |
| | — |
|
| 10/17/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 14,106 |
| | — |
| | 22.00 |
| | — |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Anthony E. Hull | 1/5/2011 | | — |
| | 2,820,250 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | |
| 4/15/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 4,626 |
| | — |
| | 22.25 |
| | — |
|
| 10/17/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 8,724 |
| | — |
| | 22.00 |
| | — |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Kevin J. Kelleher | 1/5/2011 | | — |
| | 1,810,690 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | |
| 4/15/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2,970 |
| | — |
| | 22.25 |
| | — |
|
| 10/17/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 5,601 |
| | — |
| | 22.00 |
| | — |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Alexander E. Perriello, III | 1/5/2011 | | — |
| | 2,320,250 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | |
| 4/15/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,806 |
| | — |
| | 22.25 |
| | — |
|
| 10/17/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7,177 |
| | — |
| | 22.00 |
| | — |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Bruce Zipf | 1/5/2011 | | — |
| | 2,240,500 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | |
| 4/15/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,675 |
| | — |
| | 22.25 |
| | — |
|
| 10/17/2011 | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6,931 |
| | — |
| | 22.00 |
| | — |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | Represents payout under Incentive Awards granted under Phantom Value Plan assuming RCIV receives cash for the discharge and/or sale of all of the Initial RCIV Notes (or all non-cash consideration into which the Initial RCIV Notes are exchanged or converted) equal to the aggregate principal amount of the Initial RCIV Notes on the date of issuance or $1,338,190,220. This may not be the actual payout as the aggregate amount that RCIV may receive in cash could be less or more than the aggregate principal amount of the Initial RCIV Notes. |
| |
(2) | It is not possible to calculate the threshold or maximum amounts payable under the Phantom Value Plan as it is too speculative to determine the amount of cash, if any, that RCIV may receive for the discharge of all or any portion of the Initial RCIV Notes or on the sale of all or any portion of the Initial RCIV Notes (or other non-cash consideration into which the Initial RCIV Notes are exchanged or converted). |
| |
(3) | Pursuant to the terms of the Phantom Value Plan and the Incentive Awards made thereunder, we issued non-qualified stock options to the named executive officers on April 15, 2011 and October 17, 2011, the first two dates following adoption of the Phantom Value Plan on which RCIV received cash interest on the Initial RCIV Notes. The number of stock options granted represented an aggregate value as determined by the Compensation Committee equal to an amount which bore the same ratio to the aggregate dollar amount of the named executive officer’s Incentive Award as the aggregate amount of cash interest received by RCIV on the grant date bore to the aggregate principal amount of the Initial RCIV Notes on the date of their issuance, though for purposes of calculating the number of options for the April 15, 2011 grant, the amount of interest received by RCIV was based upon the interest accrued from January 5, 2011 through April 14, 2011. Pursuant to the terms of the Phantom Value Plan, as it existed until November 2011, the stock options granted to Mr. Smith, Realogy’s Chief Executive Officer, were limited to 50% of the foregoing stock option amount. In November 2011, the Phantom Value Plan was amended to eliminate this limitation. |
| |
(4) | See footnote 3 to the Summary Compensation Table. |
Outstanding Equity Awards at 2011 Fiscal Year End
The following two tables set forth outstanding stock option awards as of December 31, 2011 held by our named executive officers. There were no other Holdings equity awards outstanding at December 31, 2011.
Outstanding Option Awards at December 31, 2011
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Name | Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options Exercisable (#) | | Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options Unexercisable (#) | | Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned Options (#) | | Option Exercise Price ($) | | Option Expiration Date (1) (2) |
Richard A. Smith | — |
| | — |
| | 7,479 |
| | 22.25 |
| | 10/15/2018 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 14,106 |
| | 22.00 |
| | 4/17/2019 |
| 9,338 |
| | 28,012 |
| | — |
| | 137.50 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
| 21,788 |
| | 65,362 |
| | — |
| | 20.75 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
Anthony E. Hull | — |
| | — |
| | 4,626 |
| | 22.25 |
| | 10/15/2018 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 8,724 |
| | 22.00 |
| | 4/17/2019 |
| 2,250 |
| | 6,750 |
| | — |
| | 137.50 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
| 5,250 |
| | 15,750 |
| | — |
| | 20.75 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
Kevin J. Kelleher | — |
| | — |
| | 2,970 |
| | 22.25 |
| | 10/15/2018 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 5,601 |
| | 22.00 |
| | 4/17/2019 |
| 1,800 |
| | 5,400 |
| | — |
| | 137.50 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
| 4,200 |
| | 12,600 |
| | — |
| | 20.75 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
Alexander E. Perriello, III | — |
| | — |
| | 3,806 |
| | 22.25 |
| | 10/15/2018 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 7,177 |
| | 22.00 |
| | 4/17/2019 |
| 2,250 |
| | 6,750 |
| | — |
| | 137.50 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
| 5,250 |
| | 15,750 |
| | — |
| | 20.75 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
Bruce Zipf | — |
| | — |
| | 3,675 |
| | 22.25 |
| | 10/15/2018 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 6,931 |
| | 22.00 |
| | 4/17/2019 |
| 1,800 |
| | 5,400 |
| | — |
| | 137.50 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
| 4,200 |
| | 12,600 |
| | — |
| | 20.75 |
| | 11/9/2020 |
_______________
| |
(1) | All options with an expiration date of October 15, 2018 or April 17, 2019 vest as to one-third of the total shares subject to the options on each of the first three anniversaries of the date of grant (April 15, 2011 for the options granted at $22.25 per share and October 17, 2011 for the options granted at $22.00 per share) but are not exercisable until one year following a qualified public offering. |
| |
(2) | All options with an expiration date of November 9, 2020 vest as to twenty-five percent (25%) of the total shares subject to the option on each of the first (4) anniversaries of July 1, 2010. |
The following table sets forth outstanding equity awards (consisting solely of stock options of Avis Budget Group and Wyndham Worldwide) as of December 31, 2011 held by our named executive officers that were issued (or in the case of Avis Budget Group equity awards, adjusted) as part of the equitable adjustment of outstanding Cendant equity awards at the date of our separation from Cendant made pursuant to the terms of the Separation Agreement. Except for tax withholding and related liabilities, the awards relating to Wyndham Worldwide common stock are liabilities of Wyndham Worldwide, and the awards relating to Avis Budget Group common stock are liabilities of Avis Budget Group. All of these stock options are fully exercisable. Avis Budget Group awards also reflect an adjustment in connection with a one-for-ten reverse stock split.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Name | Issuer | | Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options Exercisable (#) | | Exercise Price ($) | | Option Expiration Date (1) |
Richard A. Smith | Avis Budget | | 26,063 |
| | 27.40 | | 1/22/2012 |
| Wyndham Worldwide | | 52,124 |
| | 40.03 | | 1/22/2012 |
| | | | | | | |
Anthony E. Hull | Avis Budget | | 988 |
| | 28.34 | | 10/15/2013 |
| Wyndham Worldwide | | 1,976 |
| | 41.40 | | 10/15/2013 |
| | | | | | | |
Kevin J. Kelleher | Avis Budget | | 12,009 |
| | 27.40 | | 1/22/2012 |
| Wyndham Worldwide | | 24,018 |
| | 40.03 | | 1/22/2012 |
| | | | | | | |
Alexander E. Perriello, III | Avis Budget | | 6,005 |
| | 27.40 | | 1/22/2012 |
| Wyndham Worldwide | | 12,009 |
| | 40.03 | | 1/22/2012 |
| | | | | | | |
Bruce Zipf | Avis Budget | | 5,212 |
| | 26.87 | | 4/17/2012 |
| Wyndham Worldwide | | 10,424 |
| | 39.25 | | 4/17/2012 |
_______________
| |
(1) | The Avis Budget Group and Wyndham Worldwide options with an expiration date of January 22, 2012 expired without having been exercised. |
Option Exercises for Fiscal Year 2011
None of our named executive officers exercised any options for Common Stock during 2011.
None of our named executive officers exercised any Wyndham Worldwide or Avis Budget Group options during 2011.
Stock Incentive Plan
The Holdings 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended in November 2007 and further amended in November 2010, August 2011 and February 2012 (the “Stock Incentive Plan”), authorizes approximately 1.69 million shares of Common Stock, excluding the 113,400 shares that have been already been issued under the Stock Incentive Plan. The Stock Incentive Plan is administered by the Compensation Committee with certain delegations to the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Administrative Officer. Awards granted under the Stock Incentive Plan may be nonqualified stock options, rights to purchase shares of Common Stock, restricted stock, restricted stock units and other awards settleable in, or based upon, Common Stock. Awards may be granted under the Stock Incentive Plan only to persons who are employees, consultants or directors of Holdings or any of its subsidiaries on the date of the grant.
The113,400 shares issued under the Stock Incentive Plan to date are comprised of the 90,840 shares of Common Stock purchased by management in 2007 and the 22,560 shares of Common Stock subject to restricted stock awards that were made to executive officers in 2007 and to our independent director in 2008 and 2011 (all of which have vested with the exception of the 2011 restricted stock award made to our independent director). All of the stock options held by management (including board members) were granted under the Stock Incentive Plan.
Options issued under the Stock Incentive Plan must have an exercise price determined by the Compensation Committee and set forth in an option agreement. In no event, however, may the exercise price be less than the fair market value of a share of Common Stock on the date of grant. The Compensation Committee, in its sole discretion, will determine whether
and to what extent any options are subject to vesting based upon the optionee’s continued service to, and the Holdings performance of duties for, Holdings and its subsidiaries, or upon any other basis.
In the event of a merger, consolidation, acquisition of property or shares, stock rights offering, liquidation, disaffiliation or similar event affecting Holdings or any of its subsidiaries (each, a “Corporate Transaction”), the Compensation Committee may in its discretion make such substitutions or adjustments as it deems appropriate and equitable to: (a) the aggregate number and kind of share of Common Stock or other securities, (b) the number and kind of shares of Common Stock or other securities subject to outstanding awards, (c) performance metrics and targets underlying outstanding awards and (d) the option price of outstanding options. In the case of Corporate Transactions, such adjustments may include, without limitation, (1) the cancellation of outstanding equity securities issued under the Stock Incentive Plan in exchange for payments of cash, property or a combination thereof having an aggregate value equal to the value of such equity securities, as determined by the Compensation Committee in its sole discretion and (2) the substitution of other property (including, without limitation, cash or other securities of Holdings and securities of entities other than Holdings for the shares of Common Stock subject to outstanding equity securities). Following the Debt Exchange Offering and the filing of the amended and restated certificate of incorporation of Holdings on January 5, 2011, providing for two classes of Common Stock, the Compensation Committee approved action to provide that all shares issuable upon exercise of outstanding options under the Stock Incentive Plan (as well as shares of Common Stock underlying future grants under the Stock Incentive Plan) are issuable for shares of Class A Common Stock.
Upon (i) the consummation of certain sales of Holdings or (ii) any transactions or series of related transactions in which Apollo sells at least 50% of the shares of Common Stock directly or indirectly acquired by it and at least 50% of the aggregate of all investor investments (a “Realization Event”), subject to any provisions of the award agreements to the contrary with respect to certain sales of Holdings, Holdings may purchase each outstanding vested and/or unvested option for a per share amount equal to (a) the amount per share received in respect of the shares of Common Stock sold in such transaction constituting the Realization Event, less (b) the option price thereof.
The Stock Incentive Plan will terminate on the tenth anniversary of the date of its adoption by the Holdings Board, or April 10, 2017.
Realogy Pension Benefits at 2011 Fiscal Year End
Prior to Realogy’s separation from Cendant, Cendant sponsored and maintained the Cendant Corporation Pension Plan (the “Cendant Pension Plan”), which was a “defined benefit” employee pension plan subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”) and a successor to the former PHH Corporation Pension Plan (the “Former PHH Pension Plan”). During 1999, the Former PHH Pension Plan was frozen and curtailed, other than for certain employees who attained certain age and service requirements. A number of our employees were entitled to benefits under the Realogy Pension Plan by virtue of their prior participation in the Former PHH Pension Plan as well as their subsequent participation in the Cendant Pension Plan.
In connection with Realogy’s separation, Realogy adopted a new defined benefit employee pension plan, named the Realogy Corporation Pension Plan (the “Realogy Pension Plan”). At Realogy’s separation, the Realogy Pension Plan assumed all liabilities and obligations under the Cendant Pension Plan that related to the Former PHH Pension Plan. Realogy also assumed any supplemental pension obligations accrued by any participant of the Cendant Pension Plan which related to the Former PHH Pension Plan. In consideration of the Realogy Pension Plan accepting and assuming the liabilities and obligations described above under the Cendant Pension Plan, Cendant caused the Cendant Pension Plan to make a direct transfer of a portion of its assets to the Realogy Pension Plan proportional to the liabilities assumed by the Realogy Pension Plan.
The amount of the retirement benefit under the Realogy Pension Plan is determined by a formula set forth in the plan. No participants in the Realogy Pension Plan accrue any ongoing benefits other than service as the participation has been previously frozen (other than two participants whose participation is not frozen pursuant to the terms of the Realogy Pension Plan). Participants eligible to commence their pension benefit have several optional forms of payment available to them under the Realogy Pension Plan. Lump sum distributions are only permissible when the present value of a participant's benefit is $5,000 or below. The Realogy Pension Plan is funded by Realogy.
Mr. Kelleher is our only named executive officer who participates in the Realogy Pension Plan and his participation in the Cendant Pension Plan was frozen on October 31, 1999 and, as of that date, he no longer accrues additional benefits under the Cendant Pension Plan or the Realogy Pension Plan.
The following table sets forth information relating to Mr. Kelleher’s participation in the Realogy Pension Plan:
|
| | |
Number of Years of Credited Service (#) (1) | Present Value of Accumulated Benefit ($) (2) | Payments During Last Fiscal Year ($) |
27 | 466,763 | — |
_______________
| |
(1) | The number of years of credited service shown in this column is calculated based on the actual years of service with us (or Cendant) for Mr. Kelleher through December 31, 2011. |
| |
(2) | The valuations included in this column have been calculated as of December 31, 2011 assuming Mr. Kelleher will retire at the normal retirement age of 65 and using the interest rate and other assumptions as described in Note 9, “Employee Benefit Plans – Defined Benefit Pension Plan” to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report. |
Nonqualified Deferred Compensation at 2011 Fiscal Year End
In December 2008, in accordance with the transition rules under Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, our Compensation Committee amended the Realogy Officer Deferred Compensation Plan. The amendment permitted participants to revoke their current distribution elections on file and make a new unifying election for their entire account balance. The revocation and election had to be made prior to December 31, 2008. Participants could elect to receive a lump sum distribution in April 2009 or to maintain their then current election. Mr. Hull and Mr. Zipf were the only named executive officers who were participants under the Realogy Officer Deferred Compensation Plan. Each of them made new elections prior to the end of 2008. Under those new elections, they received lump sum distributions in April 2009.
Effective January 1, 2009, the Company suspended participation in the Realogy Officer Deferred Compensation Plan due to the prolonged downturn in the residential housing market and our highly levered debt structure. The suspension remains in effect. Accordingly, none of the named executive officers had any nonqualified deferred compensation at December 31, 2011.
Employment Agreements
The following summarizes the terms of the employment agreements with each of our named executive officers. Severance provisions are described in the section titled “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control.”
Mr. Smith. On April 10, 2007, we entered into a new employment agreement with Mr. Smith, with a five-year term commencing as of the effective time of the Merger (unless earlier terminated). The agreement has been automatically extended for an additional year pursuant to the terms of the employment agreement as neither party provided a 90-day notice of non-renewal. This employment agreement supersedes any prior employment agreements that we entered into with Mr. Smith. Pursuant to the agreement, Mr. Smith serves as our President. In addition, Mr. Smith has served as our Chief Executive Officer since November 13, 2007. He also serves as a member of the Boards of Directors of Realogy and Holdings during his term of employment. Mr. Smith is entitled to a base salary of $1 million (the base salary in effect for him as of immediately prior to the effective time of the Merger), may participate in employee benefit plans generally available to our executive officers, and is eligible to receive an annual bonus award with a target amount equal to 200% of his annual base salary, subject to the attainment of performance goals and his continued employment with us on the last day of the applicable bonus year, as well as adjustments based on a merit review. In connection with entering into his employment agreement and as partial consideration for his retention following the Merger, Mr. Smith received a one-time $5 million bonus in connection with the consummation of the Merger, the after-tax amount of which Mr. Smith elected to invest in shares of Common Stock.
Mr. Smith is also entitled to an annual bonus, the after-tax proceeds of which are required to be used to purchase the annual premium on an existing life insurance policy. This benefit is provided to Mr. Smith as the replacement of a benefit previously provided to him by Cendant. Mr. Smith waived his contractual right to receive this bonus with respect to the bonuses payable in January 2009 and 2010 in order to reduce Company expense.
Messrs. Hull, Kelleher, Perriello and Zipf. On April 10, 2007, we entered into new employment agreements with each of Messrs. Hull, Kelleher, Perriello and Zipf (for purposes of this section, each, an “Executive”), with a five-year term (unless earlier terminated) commencing as of the effective time of the Merger, subject to automatic extension for an additional year unless either party provides notice of non-renewal. Pursuant to these employment agreements, each of the Executives continues to serve in the same positions with us as they had served prior to the Merger.
In April 2011, we amended these agreements to provide for (1) an extended term ending on April 10, 2015, and (2) an annual base salary increase, effective April 1, 2011, and, in the case of Messrs. Hull, Kelleher and Zipf, another annual base salary increase, effective January 1, 2012. The following are the annual rates of base salary, effective April 1, 2011: for Mr. Hull, $575,000, Mr. Kelleher, $450,000, Mr. Perriello, $550,000 and Mr. Zipf, $560,000. Effective January 1, 2012, the annual base salary of Messrs. Hull, Kelleher and Zipf increased to $600,000, $475,000 and $575,000, respectively.
Under their employment agreements, Messrs. Hull, Kelleher, Perriello and Zipf are entitled to employee benefit plans generally available to our executive officers and are eligible for annual bonus awards with a target amount equal to the target bonus in effect for them as of the effective time of the Merger, which target is currently equal to 100% of each Executive’s annual base salary, subject to the attainment of performance goals and the Executive’s being employed with us on the last day of the applicable bonus year.
Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control
The following summarizes the potential payments that may be made to our named executive officers in the event of a termination of their employment or a change of control as of December 31, 2011.
If Mr. Smith’s employment is terminated by us without “cause” or by Mr. Smith for “good reason,” subject to his execution and non-revocation of a general release of claims against us and our affiliates, he will be entitled to (1) a lump sum payment of his unpaid base salary and unpaid earned bonus and (2) an aggregate amount equal to 300% of the sum of his (a) then-current annual base salary and (b) his then-current target bonus, 50% of which will be paid thirty (30) business days after his termination of employment and the remaining portion of which will be paid in thirty-six (36) equal monthly installments following his termination of employment. If Mr. Smith’s employment is terminated for any reason, Mr. Smith and his dependents may continue to participate in all of our health care and group life insurance plans until the end of the plan year in which he reaches, or would have reached, age 75, subject to his continued payment of the employee portion of the premiums for such coverage. Mr. Smith is subject to three-year post-termination non-competition and non-solicitation covenants and is entitled to be reimbursed by us for any “golden parachute” excise taxes, including taxes on any such reimbursement, subject to certain limitations described in his employment agreement.
Cause is defined in Mr. Smith’s employment agreement to mean (i) his willful failure to substantially perform his duties as an employee of the Company or any subsidiary (other than any such failure resulting from incapacity due to physical or mental illness), (ii) any act of fraud, misappropriation, dishonesty, embezzlement or similar conduct against the Company or any subsidiary, (iii) his conviction of, or plea of guilty or nolo contendere to a charge of commission of, a felony or crime involving moral turpitude, (iv) his indictment for a charge of commission of a felony or any crime involving moral turpitude, provided that the Board determines in good faith that such indictment would result in a material adverse impact to the business or reputation of the Company, (v) his gross negligence in the performance of his duties, or (vi) his purposefully or negligently making (or having been found to have made) a false certification to the Company pertaining to its financial statements; a termination will not be for “Cause” pursuant to clause (i), (ii) or (v), to the extent such conduct is curable, unless the Company shall have notified Mr. Smith in writing describing such conduct and he shall have failed to cure such conduct within ten (10) business days after his receipt of such written notice.
Good Reason is defined in Mr. Smith’s employment agreement as voluntary resignation after any of the following actions taken by the Company or any of its subsidiaries without Mr. Smith’s consent: (i) his removal from, or failure to be elected or re-elected to, the Board; (ii) a material reduction of his duties and responsibilities to the Company, (iii) a reduction in his annual base salary or target bonus (not including any diminution related to a broader compensation reduction that (a) is made in consultation with Mr. Smith and (b) is applied to all senior executives of the Company in a relatively proportionate manner); (iv) the relocation of Mr. Smith’s primary office to a location more than 30 miles from the prior location; (v) delivery of notice of non-renewal of the employment period by the Company (other than non-renewal by the Company due to Mr. Smith’s disability, termination for Cause or termination by Mr. Smith); or (vi) a material breach by the Company of a material provision of the employment agreement (including a breach of Section 2(a) of the employment agreement, which sets forth Mr. Smith’s position with the Company). A termination shall not be for “Good Reason” pursuant to clause (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv), unless Mr. Smith shall have given written notice of his intention to resign for Good Reason and the Company shall have failed to cure the event giving rise to Good Reason within ten (10) business days after the Company’s receipt of such written notice.
With respect to Messrs. Hull, Kelleher, Perriello and Zipf (also for purposes of this section, each, an “Executive”), each Executive’s employment agreement provides that if his employment is terminated by us without “cause” or by the Executive for “good reason,” subject to his execution of a general release of claims against us and our affiliates, the Executive will be entitled to:
(1) a lump sum payment of his unpaid annual base salary and unpaid earned bonus;
(2) an aggregate amount equal to (x) if such termination occurs within 12 months after a “Sale of the Company,” 200% of the sum of his (a) then-current annual base salary plus his (b) then-current annual target bonus; or (y) 100% (200% in the case of Mr. Hull) of the sum of his (a) then-current annual base salary plus his (b) then-current annual target bonus. Of such amount, 50% will be payable in a lump sum within 30 business days of the date of termination, and the remaining portion will be payable in 12 (24 in the case of Mr. Hull) equal monthly installments following his termination of employment; and
(3) from the period from the date of termination of employment to the earlier to occur of the second anniversary of such termination or the date on which the individual becomes eligible to participate in another employer’s medical and dental benefit plans, participation in the medical and dental benefit plans maintained by us for active employees, on the same terms and conditions as such active employees, as in effect from time to time during such period.
The definition of Cause and Good Reason under each Executive’s employment agreement are identical to those contained in Mr. Smith’s employment agreement except as follows: (a) clause (i) of the definition of Good Reason under Mr. Smith’s employment agreement is not contained in the definition of Good Reason in each Executive’s employment agreement; and (b) the addition of language in the definition of Good Reason that a material breach by the Company of a material provision of the Executive’s employment agreement does not include any promotion or lateral assignment of the Executive.
Each Executive is subject to a two-year post-termination non-competition covenant and three-year post-termination non-solicitation covenant.
The following table sets forth information regarding the value of potential termination payments and benefits our named executive officers would have become entitled to receive upon their termination of employment with us under certain circumstances as of December 31, 2011:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Name | | Benefit | | Termination without Cause or for Good Reason within 12 months following a Sale of the Company ($) | | Termination without Cause or for Good Reason other than within 12 months following a Sale of the Company ($) | | Death ($) | | Disability ($) |
Richard A. Smith | | Severance Pay | | 9,000,000 | (3) | | 9,000,000 |
| | 1,000,000 |
| | 1,000,000 |
|
| | Health Care (1) | | 304,484 |
| | 304,484 |
| | 304,484 |
| | 304,484 |
|
| | Equity Acceleration (2) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Anthony E. Hull | | Severance Pay | | 2,300,000 |
| | 2,300,000 |
| | 575,000 |
| | 575,000 |
|
| | Health Care | | 26,129 |
| | 26,129 |
| | 13,065 |
| | 13,065 |
|
| | Equity Acceleration (2) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Kevin J. Kelleher | | Severance Pay | | 1,800,000 |
| | 900,000 |
| | 450,000 |
| | 450,000 |
|
| | Health Care | | 17,592 |
| | 17,592 |
| | 8,796 |
| | 8,796 |
|
| | Equity Acceleration (2) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Alexander E. Perriello, III. | | Severance Pay | | 2,200,000 |
| | 1,100,000 |
| | 550,000 |
| | 550,000 |
|
| | Health Care | | 6,996 |
| | 6,996 |
| | 3,498 |
| | 3,498 |
|
| | Equity Acceleration (2) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Bruce Zipf | | Severance Pay | | 2,240,000 |
| | 1,120,000 |
| | 560,000 |
| | 560,000 |
|
| | Health Care | | 18,694 |
| | 18,694 |
| | 9,347 |
| | 9,347 |
|
| | Equity Acceleration (2) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | If Mr. Smith’s employment is terminated for any reason, Mr. Smith and his dependents may continue to participate in all of our health care and group life insurance plans until the end of the plan year in which he reaches, or would have reached, age 75, subject to his continued payment of the employee portion of the premiums for such coverage. |
| |
(2) | The vesting of options accelerate upon a Sale of the Company provided, however, that in the event the individual terminates his employment without “good reason” or his employment is terminated for “cause” within one year of the Sale of the Company, the individual would be required to remit to the Company the proceeds realized in the Sale of the Company for those options, the |
vesting of which was accelerated due to the Sale of the Company. The value ascribed to the accelerated vesting of the options is based upon a fair market value of the Common Stock of $17.50 per share as of December 31, 2011.
| |
(3) | No “golden parachute” excise tax would be payable based upon Mr. Smith’s historical compensation and, accordingly, the Company would have no obligation to reimburse Mr. Smith for any such taxes. |
Director Compensation
The following sets forth information concerning the compensation of our independent director in 2011. None of the other members of the Board of Directors received any compensation for their service as a director in 2011.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Name | Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($) (1) | | Stock Awards ($) | | Option Awards ($) | | All Other Compensation ($) | | Total ($) |
V. Ann Hailey | 85,000 |
| | 90,300 | (2) |
| 119,850 | (3) |
| — |
| | 295,150 |
|
Henry R. Silverman | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 146,964 | (4) |
| 146,964 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | Represents one-half of Ms. Hailey's $150,000 annual independent director retainer fee and the $10,000 cash fee paid for Ms. Hailey's service as Chair of our Audit Committees. One half of the annual retainer fee is payable in cash and the balance is payable pursuant to a grant of non-qualified stock options. |
| |
(2) | On March 3, 2011, Ms. Hailey was granted a restricted stock award for 4,200 shares of Class A Common Stock, 2,100 shares of which will vest 18 months following the date of grant and the balance will vest 36 months following the date of grant, subject to her continued service on the Holdings Board. We determined that the fair market value of the restricted stock awards on the date of grant ($90,300 ). The table reflects the grant date fair value of this award. The assumptions we used in determining the grant date fair value are described in Note 12, “Stock-Based Compensation” to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report. |
| |
(3) | On March 3, 2011, Ms. Hailey was granted two non-qualified options to purchase shares of Class A Common Stock at an exercise price of $21.50 per share, one for 6,000 options and the other for 4,200 options, each of which becomes exercisable at the annual rate of 25% of the total number of shares underlying the option commencing March 3, 2012, one year from the date of grant, subject to her continued service on the Holdings Board. The option for 4,200 shares represents one-half of Ms. Hailey's annual independent director grant. We determined the grant date fair value of the options on the date of grant of ($11.75 per share or $119,850 in the aggregate). The table reflects the aggregate grant date fair value of these options. The assumptions we used in determining the grant date fair value of these options are described in Note 12, “Stock-Based Compensation” to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report. |
| |
(4) | Consists of post-employment secretarial support provided to Mr. Silverman pursuant to his existing agreements with us. |
Ms. Hailey, our only independent director and the Chair of our Audit Committee, joined the Board on February 4, 2008. She receives a director retainer of $150,000 and a fee as Audit Committee Chair of $10,000, each on an annualized basis. During 2009 and 2010, the entire $150,000 director retainer fee was payable in cash pursuant to an action taken by the Compensation Committee. For 2008, of the $150,000 director retainer fee, $90,000 was payable pursuant to a grant of restricted shares of Common Stock based upon the fair market value of the Common Stock on the date of grant, provided that in connection with the initial grant made on February 4, 2008, the Common Stock was valued at $250.00 per share. The vesting of the restricted stock is identical to the vesting terms of the restricted stock awards granted to certain executive officers: namely, one-half vested 18 months following the date of grant (August 4, 2009) and the other half vested 36 months following the date of grant (February 4, 2011).
In accordance with the director compensation policy in effect in 2008, as a newly appointed independent director, Ms. Hailey also received on the date of her appointment a one-time grant of non-qualified options to purchase 2,000 shares of Common Stock with an exercise price equal to the greater of $250.00 per share or the fair market value of Common Stock on the date of grant. The options become exercisable at the rate of 25% of the underlying shares upon each of the first four anniversaries following the date of grant, subject to acceleration and vesting in full upon a Sale of the Company (as that term is defined in the Holdings Stock Incentive Plan).
On March 3, 2011, the Compensation Committee amended the Holdings’ preexisting policy with respect to compensation of directors, effective as of January 1, 2011, to eliminate the one-time grant of non-qualified options for any newly appointed independent director and to provide that one-half of the $150,000 annual independent director retainer fee is payable in cash on a quarterly basis and the remaining one-half pursuant to a grant of non-qualified stock options. The exercise price of the options is equal to the fair market value of the Class A Common Stock on the date of grant and the options become exercisable at the rate of 25% of the underlying shares upon each of the first four anniversaries following
the date of grant, subject to her continued service on the Holdings Board and subject to acceleration and vesting in full upon a Sale of the Company (as defined in the Stock Incentive Plan). The 2011 grant of non-qualified options representing one-half of Ms. Hailey's annual independent director retainer for 2011 is reflected in the table above. On February 27, 2012, the Compensation Committee awarded Ms. Hailey, as part of her 2012 annual independent director retainer, non-qualified options to purchase 5,164 shares of Class A Common Stock at $17.50 per share, in accordance with the foregoing policy.
To increase the retention incentives provided by our stock based compensation programs to Ms. Hailey, on March 3, 2011, the Compensation Committee also approved the grant of 6,000 non-qualified stock options to purchase shares of Class A Common Stock at an exercise price of $21.50 per share to become exercisable at the rate of 1,500 options per year commencing March 3, 2012, subject to her continued service on the Holdings Board, and the grant of a restricted stock award for 4,200 shares of Class A Common Stock, 2,100 shares of which will vest 18 months following the date of grant and the balance will vest 36 months following the date of grant, subject to her continued service on the Holdings Board.
In connection with Mr. Silverman’s appointment as non-executive chairman of the Company, on November 13, 2007, the Holdings Board granted Mr. Silverman an option to purchase 200,000 shares of Common Stock at $250.00 per share. The options include both time vesting (tranche A) options and performance vesting (tranche B and tranche C) options. In general, one-half of the options granted to Mr. Silverman vest and become exercisable in five equal installments on each of the 12th, 24th, 36th, 48th and 60th month anniversaries of September 1, 2007 (the tranche A options), and one-half of the options are performance vesting options, one-half of which vest upon the achievement of an internal rate of return of funds managed by Apollo with respect to its investment in Holdings of 20% (the tranche B options), and the remaining half of which vest upon the achievement of an internal rate of return of such funds of 25% (the tranche C options). We determined that excluding the effect of estimated forfeitures, in accordance with the FASB’s guidance, the fair market value of the option on the date of grant (November 13, 2007) was $64.50 per share or an aggregate of $6,450,000, which includes only the value of the time-vested options (the tranche A options). We also determined the grant date fair market value of the tranche B options and tranche C options but will only recognize those costs as compensation expense when the performance criteria are probable of occurring (e.g. an initial public offering or significant capital transaction). Assuming the highest level of performance conditions is probable, the total grant date fair value of the options would be $11,611,431. The assumptions we used in determining the value of these options on the date of grant are described in Note 12, “Stock-Based Compensation” to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report.
A director who serves on the Holdings Board does not receive any additional compensation for service on the Board of Directors of a subsidiary of Holdings, unless there shall be a committee of a subsidiary where there is not a corresponding committee of Holdings.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
Shortly prior to the consummation of the Merger, Apollo, principally through the Holdings Board, whose members then consisted of Apollo’s representatives, Messrs. Marc Becker and M. Ali Rashid, negotiated employment agreements and other arrangements with our named executive officers. Between April 10, 2007 and mid-February 2008, decisions relating to executive compensation were within the province of the Holdings Board and the Realogy Board, both of which were (and are) controlled by Apollo representatives. In February 2008, the Holdings Board established the Compensation Committee, whose members consist of Messrs. Becker and Rashid.
During 2011, none of the members of the Compensation Committee had any relationship that requires disclosure in this Annual Report as a transaction with a related person, though both members are employed by Apollo, which has engaged in related party transactions with us during 2011 as discussed in “Item 13—Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.”
During 2011, (1) none of our executive officers served as a member of the compensation committee of another entity, one of whose executive officers served on the Holdings Board or the Realogy Board; (2) none of our executive officers served as a director of another entity, one of whose executive officers served on the Holdings Board or the Realogy Board; and (3) none of our executive officers served as a member of the compensation committee of another entity, one of whose executive officers served as one of the directors of the Holdings Board or Realogy Board.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Holders and Management
All of Realogy’s issued and outstanding common stock is owned by its parent, Intermediate, and all of the issued and outstanding common stock of Intermediate is owned by its parent, Holdings. Realogy's common stock owned by Intermediate constitutes all of Realogy’s issued and outstanding capital stock.
Pursuant to Holdings’ amended and restated certificate of incorporation, Holdings has two classes of common stock, Class A Common Stock (the "Class A Common Stock") and Class B Common Stock (“Class B Common Stock” and together with the Class A Common Stock, the "Common Stock"), each with a par value of $0.01 per share. The Convertible Notes are convertible into shares of Class A Common Stock. Each share of Class A Common Stock has one vote per share. Each share of Class B Common Stock has five votes per share. The Class B Common Stock will automatically convert into Class A Common Stock on a share-for-share basis once (i) Apollo converts all of the Convertible Notes it received in the Debt Exchange Offering into shares of Class A Common Stock or (ii) upon a Qualified Public Offering, provided that such conversion would not result in a change of control of Realogy under the senior secured credit facility or any of its other debt arrangements.
The following table sets forth information regarding the beneficial ownership of Common Stock as of February 27, 2012 assuming all of the Convertible Notes are converted into Class A Common Stock, by (i) each person known to beneficially own more than 5% of the Common Stock, (ii) each of our named executive officers, (iii) each member of the Board of Directors and (iv) all of our executive officers and members of the Board of Directors as a group. At February 27, 2012, there were 8,021,280 shares of Common Stock outstanding, of which 8,017,080 were shares of Class B Common Stock and 4,200 were shares of Class A Common Stock subject to a restricted stock award.
The amounts and percentages of Common Stock beneficially owned are reported on the basis of regulations of the SEC governing the determination of beneficial ownership of securities. Under the rules of the SEC, a person is deemed to be a “beneficial owner” of a security if that person has or shares “voting power,” which includes the power to vote or to direct the voting of such security, or “investment power,” which includes the power to dispose of or to direct the disposition of such security. A person is also deemed to be a beneficial owner of any securities of which that person has a right to acquire beneficial ownership within 60 days. Under these rules, more than one person may be deemed a beneficial owner of the same securities and a person may be deemed a beneficial owner of securities as to which he has no economic interest.
Except as indicated by footnote, the persons named in the table below have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of Common Stock shown as beneficially owned by them.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Name of Beneficial Owner | | Amount and Nature of Beneficial Ownership of Class A Common Stock (1) | | Amount and Nature of Beneficial Ownership of Class B Common Stock | | Percentage of Class B Common Stock | | Percentage of Common Stock (1) |
Apollo Funds (2) | | 51,077,546 |
| | 7,912,801 |
| | 98.7 | % | | 66.2 | % |
Henry R. Silverman (3) (9) | | 80,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | * |
|
Richard A. Smith (4) | | 31,125 |
| | 36,481 |
| | * |
| | * |
|
Anthony E. Hull (5) | | 7,500 |
| | 11,281 |
| | * |
| | * |
|
Kevin J. Kelleher (6) | | 6,000 |
| | 7,243 |
| | * |
| | * |
|
Alexander E. Perriello, III (7) | | 7,500 |
| | 9,282 |
| | * |
| | * |
|
Bruce Zipf (8) | | 6,000 |
| | 8,962 |
| | * |
| | * |
|
Marc E. Becker (9) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | * |
|
V. Ann Hailey (10) | | 8,750 |
| | 360 |
| | * |
| | * |
|
Scott M. Kleinman (9) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | * |
|
M. Ali Rashid (8) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | * |
|
Directors and executive officers as a group (14 persons) (11) | | 159,275 |
| | 87,437 |
| | 1.1 | % | | * |
|
Paulson & Co. Inc. (12) | | 19,160,887 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 21.5 | % |
York Capital Management (13) | | 4,138,202 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 4.64 | % |
Western Asset Management Company (14) | | 2,417,835 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2.72 | % |
_______________
| |
(1) | Assumes conversion of all outstanding Convertible Notes into shares of Class A Common Stock. As of February 27, 2012, $1,143,706,000 aggregate principal amount of Series A Convertible Notes, $291,424,196 aggregate principal amount of Series B Convertible Notes and $675,111,000 aggregate principal amount of Series C Convertible Notes were outstanding. The initial conversion rates of the Convertible Notes are 39.0244 shares of Class A Common Stock per $1,000 aggregate principal amount of Series A Convertible Notes or Series B Convertible Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $25.625 per share, and 37.0714 shares of Class A Common Stock per $1,000 aggregate principal amount of Series C Convertible Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $26.975 per share. The conversion rates are subject to certain anti-dilution adjustments. Assuming all of the Convertible Notes were converted into Class A Common Stock at the applicable initial conversion rates and assuming conversion of all of the Class B Common Stock into Class A Common Stock on a share-for-share basis, there would be 89,053,646 shares of Class A Common Stock outstanding as of February 27, 2012. |
| |
(2) | Reflects: (i) the aggregate amount of outstanding shares of Class B common stock of Domus Holdings Corp. that are held of record by Apollo Investment Fund VI, L.P. (“AIF VI LP”), Domus Investment Holdings, LLC (“Domus LLC”) and Domus Co-Investment Holdings LLC (“Domus Co-Invest LLC”), and (ii) the number of shares of Class A common stock of Domus Holdings Corp. issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes held by RCIV Holdings (Luxembourg) S.à.r.l. (“RCIV Luxembourg”). The general partner of AIF VI LP is Apollo Advisors VI, L.P. (“Advisors VI”). The general partner of Advisors VI is Apollo Capital Management VI, LLC (“ACM VI”). The sole member and manager of ACM VI is Apollo Principal Holdings I, L.P. (“Principal I”), and the general partner of Principal I is Apollo Principal Holdings I GP, LLC (“Principal I GP” and together with Advisors VI, ACM VI and Principal I, the “Apollo Advisor Entities”). The sole shareholder of RCIV Luxembourg is RCIV Holdings, L.P. (“RCIV LP”). Apollo Management VI, L.P. (“Management VI”) is the manager of each of AIF VI LP, Domus LLC and RCIV LP, and the managing member of Domus Co-Invest LLC, and as such has voting and investment power over the shares of Domus Holdings Corp. held of record by AIF VI LP, Domus LLC and Domus Co-Invest LLC, and of any shares of Domus Holdings Corp. held by RCIV Luxembourg upon conversion of the Convertible Notes. The general partner of Management VI is AIF VI Management, LLC (“AIF VI LLC”), and the sole member and manager of AIF VI LLC is Apollo Management, L.P. (“Apollo Management”). The general partner of Apollo Management is Apollo Management GP, LLC (“Management GP”). The sole member and manager of Management GP is Apollo Management Holdings, L.P. (“Management Holdings”). The general partner of Management Holdings is Apollo Management Holdings GP, LLC (“Management Holdings GP” and together with Management VI, AIF VI LLC, Apollo Management, Management GP and Management Holdings, the “Apollo Management Entities”). Leon Black, Joshua Harris and Marc Rowan are the managers, as well as principal executive officers, of Management Holdings GP, and the managers of Principal I GP. Each of AIF VI LP, Domus LLC, Domus Co-Invest LLC, RCIV Luxembourg, RCIV LP, the Apollo Advisor Entities, the Apollo Management Entities, and Messrs. Black, Harris and Rowan, disclaims beneficial ownership of the shares of capital stock of Realogy held by Intermediate, and of the shares of Common Stock of Domus Holdings Corp. not held of record by them, except to the extent of any pecuniary interest therein. The address of AIF VI LP, Domus LLC, Domus Co-Invest LLC and each of the Apollo Advisor Entities is One Manhattanville Road, Suite 201, Purchase, New York 10577. The address of RCIV Luxembourg is 44, Avenue John F. Kennedy, L-1885, Luxembourg. The address of RCIV LP is c/o Walkers Corporate Services Limited, Walker House, 87 Mary Street, George Town, Grand Cayman KY1-9005, Cayman Islands. The address of each of the Apollo Management Entities, and of Messrs. Black, Harris and Rowan, is 9 West 57th Street, 43rd Floor, New York, New York 10019. The amount reported as beneficially owned does not include 270,769 shares of Common Stock (including 104,277 shares of Class B Common Stock held outright, 182,293 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon exercise of options exercisable within 60 days of February 27, 2012, and 4,200 shares of Class A Common Stock subject to vesting under a restricted stock agreement) beneficially owned by certain of our directors, executive officers and other members of our management, for which AIF VI LLC, Domus LLC, RCIV Luxembourg and RCIV LP have voting power and the power to cause the sale of such shares under certain circumstances pursuant to the Management Investor Rights Agreement (as defined below). |
| |
(3) | Includes 80,000 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon currently exercisable options but does not include 120,000 shares of Class A Common Stock that are issuable upon the exercise of options that remain subject to vesting. |
| |
(4) | Includes 31,125 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon currently exercisable options. Does not include an additional 114,959 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of options that are not yet exercisable, including 2,493 options that will vest within 60 days of February 27, 2012 but will not become exercisable until the first anniversary of a Qualified Public Offering. |
| |
(5) | Includes 7,500 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon currently exercisable options. Does not include an additional 35,849 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of options that are not yet exercisable, including 1,542 options that will vest within 60 days of February 27, 2012 but will not become exercisable until the first anniversary of a Qualified Public Offering. |
| |
(6) | Includes 6,000 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of currently exercisable options. Does not include an additional 26,571 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of options that are not yet exercisable, including 990 options that will vest within 60 days of February 27, 2012 but will not become exercisable until the first anniversary of a Qualified Public Offering. |
| |
(7) | Includes 7,500 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of currently exercisable options. Does not include an additional 33,483 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of options that are not yet exercisable, including 1,269 options that will vest within 60 days of February 27, 2012 but will not become exercisable until the first anniversary of a Qualified Public Offering. |
| |
(8) | Includes 6,000 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of currently exercisable options. Does not include an additional 28,605 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of options that are not yet exercisable, including 1,225 options that will vest within 60 days of February 27, 2012 but will not become exercisable until the first anniversary of a Qualified Public Offering. |
| |
(9) | Messrs. Silverman, Becker, Kleinman and Rashid are each associated with Apollo and certain of its affiliates. Although each of Messrs. Silverman, Becker, Kleinman and Rashid may be deemed the beneficial owner of shares beneficially owned by Apollo, each of them disclaims beneficial ownership of any such shares. |
| |
(10) | Includes 4,550 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of currently exercisable options and 4,200 shares of Class A Common Stock subject to vesting under a restricted stock agreement. Does not include an additional 12,814 shares of Class A Common Stock that are issuable upon the exercise of options that remain subject to vesting. |
| |
(11) | Includes options to purchase 155,075 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of currently exercisable options and 4,200 shares of Class A Common Stock subject to vesting under a restricted stock agreement. Does not include an additional 425,842 shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon the exercise of options that are not yet exercisable, including 9,408 options that will vest within 60 days of February 27, 2012 but will not become exercisable until the first anniversary of a Qualified Public Offering. |
| |
(12) | The information in the table is based upon information furnished to us by such person on February 2, 2012 and consists of all of the shares of Class A Common Stock held by such person assuming conversion of their Convertible Notes. Assuming only Paulson converts its Convertible Notes, it would own approximately 70.5% of the total outstanding shares of Common Stock and approximately 32.3% of the voting power with respect to the Common Stock. Paulson & Co. Inc. holds the Convertible Notes and the shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes owned by Paulson Credit Opportunities Master Ltd. (“Paulson Credit”). Paulson Credit has indicated that Paulson Management II LLC has sole voting power and investment authority with respect to the Convertible Notes and shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes held by Paulson. John Paulson controls Paulson & Co. Inc. and may be deemed the beneficial owner of the Convertible Notes and shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes beneficially owned by Paulson Credit but disclaims beneficial ownership of any Convertible Notes or Class A Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes. The address for Paulson is 1251 Avenue of the Americas, 50th Floor, New York, New York 10020. |
| |
(13) | The information in the table is based upon information furnished to us by such person on February 9, 2012 and consists of all of the shares of Class A Common Stock held by such person assuming conversion of their Convertible Notes. Assuming only York converts its Convertible Notes, it would own approximately 34.0% of the total outstanding shares of Common Stock and approximately 9.4% of the voting power with respect to the Common Stock. Includes $1,381,500 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Jorvik Multi-Strategy Master Fund, L.P.; $10,966,500 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by York Capital Management, L.P.; $30,137,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by York Credit Opportunities Fund, L.P.; $35,240,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by York Credit Opportunities Master Fund, L.P.; and $21,432,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by York Multi-Strategy Master Fund, L.P. and $7,358,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by York Event-Driven UCITS Fund (collectively, the “York Entities”). The York Entities have indicated that York Capital Management Global Advisors, LLC exercises sole voting and dispositive power with respect to the Convertible Notes and Class A Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes held by the York Entities. James G. Dinan controls York Capital Management Global Advisors, LLC, and disclaims beneficial ownership of the Convertible Notes and the shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes held by the York Entities. The address for York is 767 Fifth Avenue, 17th Floor, New York, New York 10153. |
| |
(14) | The information in the table is based upon information furnished to us by such person on February 14, 2012 and consists of all of the shares of Class A Common Stock held by such person assuming conversion of their Convertible Notes. Convertible Notes owned by Western Asset Management Company include all Convertible Notes held in investment funds and separately managed client accounts for which Western Asset Management serves as investment manager, including $5,000,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset US High Yield Bond Fund; $5,250,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by LM WA US HY Bond plc, $1,150,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Stichting Pensioen Funds DSM Nederland, $680,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by CGCM High Yield Investments, $396,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Kern Country Employee’s Retirement Assoc., $5,150,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Opportunistic US$ H.Y. LLC, $1,140,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Strategic US$ HY LLC, $1,400,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset High Income Corporate Bond Fund, $3,640,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Global High Yield Bond Fund, $2,000,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Strategic Bond Opp. Port, $3,964,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset High Yield Bond Fund , $590,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by LM WA Variable High Income Portfolio, $2,000,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Managed High Income Fund Inc. (MHY), $3,687,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by LM WA High Income Fund, $110,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by LM WA Variable Global HY Bond Portfolio, $7,025,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset High Income Fund II Inc. (HIX), $420,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset High Income Fund Inc. (HIF), $1,310,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Global High Income Fund Inc. (EHI), $1,470,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by LM WA Global HY Bond Fund, $3,230,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset High Income Opportunity Fund Inc. (HIO), $770,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Global Partners Income Fund Inc. (GDF), $330,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by |
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, $3,035,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by Western Asset High Yield Portfolio, $5,770,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by John Hancock II High Yield Fund and $2,440,000 principal amount of Convertible Notes held by John Hancock Variable Ins. Trust - High Yield Trust. Christopher Jacobs exercises voting and dispositive power with respect to the Convertible Notes and Class A Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Management Company. Christopher Jacobs disclaims beneficial ownership of the Convertible Notes and the shares of Class A Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes held by Western Asset Management Company. The address for WAMCO is 385 E. Colorado Blvd., Pasadena, CA 91101.
Equity-Based Compensation Plans
Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plan
In connection with the closing of the Merger on April 10, 2007, the Holdings Board adopted the Stock Incentive Plan. The Stock Incentive Plan authorizes the Holdings Board, or a committee thereof, to grant unqualified stock options, rights to purchase shares of Common Stock, restricted stock, restricted stock units and other awards settleable in, or based upon, Common Stock, to directors and employees of, and consultants to, Holdings and its subsidiaries, including Realogy. On November 13, 2007, the Holdings Board amended and restated the Stock Incentive Plan to increase the number of shares of Common Stock authorized for issuance thereunder from 0.6 million to 0.8 million. The Stock Incentive Plan was further amended on November 9, 2010 and August 2, 2011, the latter amendment and restatement increasing the authorized shares for issuance under the Stock Incentive Plan by an additional 0.2 million shares. On February 27, 2012, the Stock Incentive Plan was further amended and restated to increase the authorized shares for issuance thereunder by an additional 0.8 million shares. For additional discussion of our equity compensation, see “Item 11—Executive Compensation—Stock Incentive Plan” and Note 12, “Stock-Based Compensation” of our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report. The table below summarizes the equity issuances under the Stock Incentive Plan as of December 31, 2011:
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Plan Category | | Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise or Vesting of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights | | Weighted Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights (1) | | Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans |
Equity compensation plans-approved by stockholders | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Equity compensation plans-not approved by stockholders | | 715,787 | (2) | | $ | 99.50 |
| | 170,813 | (3) |
_______________
| |
(1) | Does not include 4,200 restricted shares outstanding at December 31, 2011. |
| |
(2) | In addition, of the shares of Common Stock issued and outstanding at December 31, 2011, there were109,200 shares of Common Stock that had been purchased or had vested under the Stock Incentive Plan pursuant to individual subscription agreements and restricted stock awards (including shares that have been forfeited to satisfy tax withholding obligations). |
| |
(3) | Also gives effect to shares issued under the Stock Incentive Plan as described in footnote (2). |
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statements and Schedules.
(A)(1) and (2) Financial Statements
The consolidated financial statements of the registrants listed in the “Index to Financial Statements” on page F-1 together with the report of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, independent auditors, are filed as part of this Annual Report.
(A)(3) Exhibits
See Index to Exhibits.
(A)(4) Consolidated Financial Statement Schedules
Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts.
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Realogy Holdings Corp.
In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, equity (deficit) and cash flows present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Realogy Holdings Corp. (formerly known as Domus Holdings Corp.) and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2011 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 15 (A)(4) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company's management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated 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 audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A company's 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 company's 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 company's 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.
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Florham Park, New Jersey
March 2, 2012, except with respect to our opinion on the consolidated financial statements insofar as it relates to the effects of the reverse stock split and the NRT franchise agreement matter as described in Note 1, as to which the date is September 27, 2012
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholder of Realogy Corporation
In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, equity (deficit) and cash flows present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Realogy Corporation and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2011 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 15 (A)(4) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company's management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated 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 audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A company's 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 company's 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 company's 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.
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Florham Park, New Jersey
March 2, 2012, except with respect to our opinion on the consolidated financial statements insofar as it relates to the effects of the reverse stock split and the NRT franchise agreement matter as described in Note 1, as to which the date is September 27, 2012
REALOGY HOLDINGS CORP. AND REALOGY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In millions, except per share data)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Revenues | | | | | |
Gross commission income | $ | 2,926 |
| | $ | 2,965 |
| | $ | 2,886 |
|
Service revenue | 752 |
| | 700 |
| | 621 |
|
Franchise fees | 256 |
| | 263 |
| | 273 |
|
Other | 159 |
| | 162 |
| | 152 |
|
Net revenues | 4,093 |
| | 4,090 |
| | 3,932 |
|
Expenses | | | | | |
Commission and other agent-related costs | 1,932 |
| | 1,932 |
| | 1,850 |
|
Operating | 1,270 |
| | 1,241 |
| | 1,263 |
|
Marketing | 185 |
| | 179 |
| | 161 |
|
General and administrative | 254 |
| | 238 |
| | 250 |
|
Former parent legacy costs (benefit), net | (15 | ) | | (323 | ) | | (34 | ) |
Restructuring costs | 11 |
| | 21 |
| | 70 |
|
Merger costs | 1 |
| | 1 |
| | 1 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | 186 |
| | 197 |
| | 194 |
|
Interest expense/(income), net | 666 |
| | 604 |
| | 583 |
|
Loss (gain) on the early extinguishment of debt | 36 |
| | — |
| | (75 | ) |
Other (income)/expense, net | — |
| | (6 | ) | | 3 |
|
Total expenses | 4,526 |
| | 4,084 |
| | 4,266 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests | (433 | ) | | 6 |
| | (334 | ) |
Income tax expense (benefit) | 32 |
| | 133 |
| | (50 | ) |
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated entities | (26 | ) | | (30 | ) | | (24 | ) |
Net loss | (439 | ) | | (97 | ) | | (260 | ) |
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
Net loss attributable to Realogy Holdings and Realogy | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (262 | ) |
| | | | | |
Earnings (loss) per share attributable to Realogy Holdings: | | | | | |
Basic loss per share: | (55.01 | ) | | (12.35 | ) | | (32.71 | ) |
Diluted loss per share: | (55.01 | ) | | (12.35 | ) | | (32.71 | ) |
Weighted average common and common equivalent shares of Realogy Holdings outstanding: | | | | | |
Basic: | 8.0 |
| | 8.0 |
| | 8.0 |
|
Diluted: | 8.0 |
| | 8.0 |
| | 8.0 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
REALOGY HOLDINGS CORP. AND REALOGY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
(In millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Net loss | $ | (439 | ) | | $ | (97 | ) | | $ | (260 | ) |
Currency Translation Adjustment | (1 | ) | | — |
| | 3 |
|
Defined Benefit Pension Plan: | | | | | |
Actuarial loss for pension plan | (24 | ) | | (7 | ) | | (4 | ) |
Less: amortization of actuarial loss to periodic pension cost | (3 | ) | | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
Defined benefit pension plan | (21 | ) | | (5 | ) | | (2 | ) |
Cash Flow Hedges: | | | | | |
Unrealized loss on interest rate hedges | — |
| | (11 | ) | | (10 | ) |
Less: interest rate hedge losses to interest expense | (1 | ) | | (19 | ) | | (23 | ) |
Less: de-designation of interest rate hedges to interest expense | (17 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Cash flow hedges | 18 |
| | 8 |
| | 13 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss), before tax | (4 | ) | | 3 |
| | 14 |
|
Income tax expense (benefit) related to items of other comprehensive income | (2 | ) | | 1 |
| | — |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | (2 | ) | | 2 |
| | 14 |
|
Comprehensive loss | (441 | ) | | (95 | ) | | (246 | ) |
Less: comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interests | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
Comprehensive loss attributable to Realogy Holdings and Realogy | $ | (443 | ) | | $ | (97 | ) | | $ | (248 | ) |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
REALOGY HOLDINGS CORP. AND REALOGY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In millions)
|
| | | | | | | |
| Revised December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
ASSETS | | | |
Current assets: | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 143 |
| | $ | 192 |
|
Trade receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $64 and $67) | 120 |
| | 114 |
|
Relocation receivables | 378 |
| | 386 |
|
Relocation properties held for sale | 11 |
| | 21 |
|
Deferred income taxes | 66 |
| | 76 |
|
Other current assets | 88 |
| | 109 |
|
Total current assets | 806 |
| | 898 |
|
Property and equipment, net | 165 |
| | 186 |
|
Goodwill | 3,299 |
| | 3,296 |
|
Trademarks | 732 |
| | 732 |
|
Franchise agreements, net | 1,697 |
| | 1,764 |
|
Other intangibles, net | 439 |
| | 478 |
|
Other non-current assets | 212 |
| | 215 |
|
Total assets | $ | 7,350 |
| | $ | 7,569 |
|
| | | |
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY (DEFICIT) | | | |
Current liabilities: | | | |
Accounts payable | $ | 184 |
| | $ | 203 |
|
Securitization obligations | 327 |
| | 331 |
|
Due to former parent | 80 |
| | 104 |
|
Revolving credit facility and current portion of long-term debt | 325 |
| | 194 |
|
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities | 520 |
| | 525 |
|
Total current liabilities | 1,436 |
| | 1,357 |
|
Long-term debt | 6,825 |
| | 6,698 |
|
Deferred income taxes | 421 |
| | 414 |
|
Other non-current liabilities | 167 |
| | 163 |
|
Total liabilities | 8,849 |
| | 8,632 |
|
Commitments and contingencies (Notes 13 and 14) |
|
| |
|
|
Equity (deficit): | | | |
Realogy Holdings common stock: $.01 par value; 178,000,000 shares authorized, 4,200 Class A shares outstanding, 8,017,080 Class B shares outstanding at December 31, 2011 and 8,017,240 Class B shares outstanding at December 31, 2010 (Realogy common stock: $.01 par value, 100 shares authorized, issued and outstanding at December 31, 2011 and 2010) | — |
| | — |
|
Additional paid-in capital | 2,033 |
| | 2,026 |
|
Accumulated deficit | (3,502 | ) | | (3,061 | ) |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (32 | ) | | (30 | ) |
Total Realogy Holdings stockholders' deficit | (1,501 | ) | | (1,065 | ) |
Noncontrolling interests | 2 |
| | 2 |
|
Total equity (deficit) | (1,499 | ) | | (1,063 | ) |
Total liabilities and equity (deficit) | $ | 7,350 |
| | $ | 7,569 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
REALOGY HOLDINGS CORP. AND REALOGY CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Operating Activities | | | | | |
Net loss | $ | (439 | ) | | $ | (97 | ) | | $ | (260 | ) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities: | | | | | |
Depreciation and amortization | 186 |
| | 197 |
| | 194 |
|
Deferred income taxes | 18 |
| | 131 |
| | (59 | ) |
Amortization and write-off of deferred financing costs and discount on unsecured notes | 18 |
| | 30 |
| | 29 |
|
Loss (gain) on the early extinguishment of debt | 36 |
| | — |
| | (75 | ) |
De-designation of interest rate hedge | 17 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated entities | (26 | ) | | (30 | ) | | (24 | ) |
Other adjustments to net loss | 12 |
| | 20 |
| | 43 |
|
Net change in assets and liabilities, excluding the impact of acquisitions and dispositions: | | | | | |
Trade receivables | (6 | ) | | (9 | ) | | 40 |
|
Relocation receivables and advances | 8 |
| | (27 | ) | | 442 |
|
Relocation properties held for sale | 9 |
| | 43 |
| | 22 |
|
Other assets | 3 |
| | (6 | ) | | 19 |
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities | (23 | ) | | 30 |
| | 26 |
|
Due (to) from former parent | (23 | ) | | (403 | ) | | (48 | ) |
Other, net | 18 |
| | 3 |
| | (8 | ) |
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities | (192 | ) | | (118 | ) | | 341 |
|
Investing Activities | | | | | |
Property and equipment additions | (49 | ) | | (49 | ) | | (40 | ) |
Net assets acquired (net of cash acquired) and acquisition-related payments | (6 | ) | | (17 | ) | | (5 | ) |
Net proceeds from sale of assets | — |
| | 5 |
| | — |
|
Proceeds from (purchase of) certificates of deposit, net | 5 |
| | (9 | ) | | — |
|
Change in restricted cash | 6 |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) |
Other, net | (5 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Net cash used in investing activities | (49 | ) | | (70 | ) | | (47 | ) |
Financing Activities | | | | | |
Net change in revolving credit facilities | 145 |
| | 142 |
| | (515 | ) |
Proceeds from issuance of First and a Half Lien Notes | 700 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Proceeds from term loan extension | 98 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Proceeds from issuance of Second Lien Loans | — |
| | — |
| | 500 |
|
Repayments of term loan credit facility | (706 | ) | | (32 | ) | | (32 | ) |
Repayment of prior securitization obligations | (299 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Proceeds from new securitization obligations | 295 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Net change in securitization obligations | — |
| | 27 |
| | (410 | ) |
Debt issuance costs | (35 | ) | | — |
| | (11 | ) |
Other, net | (6 | ) | | (13 | ) | | (11 | ) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | 192 |
| | 124 |
| | (479 | ) |
Effect of changes in exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents | — |
| | 1 |
| | 3 |
|
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents | (49 | ) | | (63 | ) | | (182 | ) |
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period | 192 |
| | 255 |
| | 437 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | $ | 143 |
| | $ | 192 |
| | $ | 255 |
|
| | | | | |
Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information | | | | | |
Interest payments (including securitization interest expense) | $ | 608 |
| | $ | 550 |
| | $ | 487 |
|
Income tax payments, net | 3 |
| | 7 |
| | 6 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
REALOGY HOLDINGS CORP.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY (DEFICIT)
(In millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Realogy Holdings Stockholders' Equity - Revised | | | | |
| | Common Stock | | Additional Paid-In Capital | | Accumulated Deficit | | Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss | | Non- controlling Interests | | Total Equity (Deficit) |
|
| |
| | Shares | | Amount | |
| Balance at January 1, 2009 | 8.0 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,013 |
| | $ | (2,700 | ) | | $ | (46 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (731 | ) |
| Net loss | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (262 | ) | | — |
| | 2 |
| | (260 | ) |
| Other comprehensive income | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 14 |
| | — |
| | 14 |
|
| Stock-based compensation | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
|
| Dividends | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
| Balance at December 31, 2009 | 8.0 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,020 |
| | $ | (2,962 | ) | | $ | (32 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (972 | ) |
| Net loss | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (97 | ) |
| Other comprehensive income | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 2 |
|
| Stock-based compensation | — |
| | — |
| | 6 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6 |
|
| Dividends | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
| Balance at December 31, 2010 | 8.0 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,026 |
| | $ | (3,061 | ) | | $ | (30 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (1,063 | ) |
| Net loss | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (439 | ) |
| Other comprehensive loss | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | (2 | ) |
| Stock-based compensation | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
|
| Dividends | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
| Balance at December 31, 2011 | 8.0 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,033 |
| | $ | (3,502 | ) | | $ | (32 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (1,499 | ) |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
REALOGY HOLDINGS CORP. AND REALOGY CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unless otherwise noted, all amounts are in millions, except per share amounts)
Realogy Holdings Corp., a Delaware corporation (“Holdings”), formerly known as Domus Holdings Corp. is a holding company for its wholly owned subsidiary, Domus Intermediate Holdings Corp. (“Intermediate”). Intermediate is a holding company for its wholly owned subsidiary, Realogy Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Realogy”), and its subsidiaries (Holdings, Intermediate and Realogy and its subsidiaries being referred to herein collectively as the “Company”). Holdings derives all of its operating income and cash flows from Realogy and its subsidiaries.
Holdings was incorporated on December 14, 2006. On December 15, 2006, Holdings and its wholly owned subsidiary Domus Acquisition Corp., entered into an agreement and plan of merger (the “Merger”) with Realogy which was consummated on April 10, 2007 with Holdings becoming the indirect parent company of Realogy. Holdings is owned by investment funds affiliated with, or co-investment vehicles managed by, Apollo Management VI, L.P., an entity affiliated with Apollo Management, L.P. (collectively referred to as “Apollo”) and members of the Company’s management. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, all of Realogy’s issued and outstanding common stock was currently owned by Intermediate, a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of Holdings.
Realogy is a global provider of real estate and relocation services. Realogy was incorporated on January 27, 2006 to facilitate a plan by Cendant Corporation (now known as Avis Budget Group, Inc.) to separate into four independent companies—one for each of Cendant’s business units - real estate services or Realogy, travel distribution services (“Travelport”), hospitality services including timeshare resorts (“Wyndham Worldwide”), and vehicle rental (“Avis Budget Group”). On July 31, 2006, the separation (“Separation”) from Cendant became effective.
The accompanying financial statements comprise the consolidated financial statements of Holdings and Realogy. Holdings’ only asset is its investment in the common stock of Intermediate, and Intermediate’s only asset is its investment in the common stock of Realogy. Holdings’ only obligations are its guarantees of certain borrowings of Realogy. All expenses incurred by Holdings and Intermediate are for the benefit of Realogy and have been reflected in Realogy’s consolidated financial statements. All issuances of Holdings’ equity securities, including grants of stock options and restricted stock by Holdings to employees and directors of Realogy and its subsidiaries have been reflected in Realogy’s consolidated financial statements. As a result, the consolidated financial positions, results of operations and cash flows of Holdings, Intermediate and Realogy are the same. The consolidated financial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated.
NRT Franchise Agreement – Revision of Prior Period Financial Statements
In connection with the preparation of the Registration Statement, the Company identified and corrected an error in the manner in which it had allocated the purchase price paid by Apollo subsequent to their 2007 acquisition. Specifically, the Company inappropriately identified the discounted cash flows generated from the Real Estate Franchise Services franchise agreement with NRT as a separately identifiable indefinite lived intangible asset. The Company concluded that the value ascribed to this agreement should have been attributed to the Real Estate Franchise Services business unit as goodwill. Accordingly, the Company corrected its error through the elimination of the Real Estate Franchise Services franchise agreement with NRT intangible asset and increased the value associated with its goodwill, which resulted in a concurrent decrease in its deferred income tax liability. In accordance with accounting guidance found in ASC 250-10 (SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 99, Materiality), the Company assessed the materiality of the error and concluded that the error was not material to any of its previously issued financial statements. This non-cash error had no impact to the Company's consolidated statement of operations or cash flows for any of the periods presented in these financial statements.
The following table presents the effect the revision had on the Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2011 and 2010:
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | December 31, 2011 |
| | (in millions) |
| | As Previously Reported | | Adjustment | | As Revised |
Goodwill | | 2,614 |
| | 685 |
| | 3,299 |
|
Franchise agreements, net | | 2,842 |
| | (1,145 | ) | | 1,697 |
|
Total Assets | | 7,810 |
| | (460 | ) | | 7,350 |
|
Deferred income taxes | | 890 |
| | (469 | ) | | 421 |
|
Total Liabilities | | 9,318 |
| | (469 | ) | | 8,849 |
|
Accumulated deficit | | (3,511 | ) | | 9 |
| | (3,502 | ) |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | December 31, 2010 |
| | (in millions) |
| | As Previously Reported | | Adjustment | | As Revised |
Goodwill | | 2,611 |
| | 685 |
| | 3,296 |
|
Franchise agreements, net | | 2,909 |
| | (1,145 | ) | | 1,764 |
|
Total Assets | | 8,029 |
| | (460 | ) | | 7,569 |
|
Deferred income taxes | | 883 |
| | (469 | ) | | 414 |
|
Total Liabilities | | 9,101 |
| | (469 | ) | | 8,632 |
|
Accumulated deficit | | (3,070 | ) | | 9 |
| | (3,061 | ) |
Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation; Reverse Stock Split:
On September 11, 2012, the Board of Directors of Holdings approved an amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation to effect a change in the name of Domus Holdings Corp. to Realogy Holdings Corp., to amend and restate its authorized capital stock and to approve a reverse stock split of the Company's Class A and Class B Common Stock at a ratio of 1 to 25 (the “Reverse Stock Split”). On the same day, the stockholders of the Company approved the foregoing amendments to the Company's Certificate of Incorporation.
On September 27, 2012, Holdings filed a Certificate of Amendment to its Certificate of Incorporation (the “Certificate of Amendment”) with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware to effect the change in authorized capital stock, the Reverse Stock Split and the name change. The Certificate of Amendment provides that the Reverse Stock Split became effective upon filing, at which time every twenty five (25) issued and outstanding shares of Holdings' Class A Common Stock and Class B Common Stock were automatically combined into one (1) issued and outstanding share of the respective class of the Holdings' Common Stock, without any change in par value. Immediately following the Reverse Stock Split, there were 4,200 shares of Class A Common Stock issued and outstanding and 8,017,080 shares of Class B Common stock issued and outstanding. Holdings did not issue any fractional shares in connection with the Reverse Stock Split, but rounded those shares up to the next whole share. Pursuant to the terms of the Convertible Notes, the stated conversion rates applicable to each series of Convertible Notes were adjusted to reflect the Reverse Stock Split. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, the number of shares reserved there under, as well as the number of options outstanding and their stated exercise prices, was adjusted to reflect the Reverse Stock Split. All amounts and per share data presented in the accompanying consolidated financial statements and related notes give retroactive effect to the Reverse Stock Split for all periods presented.
Business Description
The Company reports its operations in the following business segments:
| |
• | Real Estate Franchise Services (known as Realogy Franchise Group or RFG)—franchises the Century 21®, Coldwell Banker®, ERA®, Sotheby’s International Realty®, Coldwell Banker Commercial® and Better Homes and Gardens® Real Estate brand names. As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s franchise system had approximately 14,000 franchised and company owned offices and 245,800 independent sales associates operating under the Company’s brands in the U.S. and 100 other countries and territories around the world, which included |
approximately 725 company owned and operated brokerage offices with approximately 42,100 independent sales associates.
| |
• | Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services (known as NRT)—operates a full-service real estate brokerage business principally under the Coldwell Banker®, ERA®, Corcoran Group® and Sotheby’s International Realty® brand names. In addition, the Company operates a large independent real estate owned (“REO”) residential asset manager, which focuses on bank-owned properties. |
| |
• | Relocation Services (known as Cartus)—primarily offers clients employee relocation services such as homesale assistance, home finding and other destination services, expense processing, relocation policy counseling and other consulting services, arranging household goods moving services, visa and immigration support, intercultural and language training, and group move management services. |
| |
• | Title and Settlement Services (known as Title Resource Group or TRG)—provides full-service title, settlement and vendor management services to real estate companies, affinity groups, corporations and financial institutions with many of these services provided in connection with the Company’s real estate brokerage and relocation services business. |
2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering
On February 2, 2012, Realogy issued $593 million of First Lien Notes and $325 million of New First and a Half Lien Notes to repay amounts outstanding under its senior secured credit facility. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are senior secured obligations of the Company and will mature on January 15, 2020. Interest is payable semiannually on January 15 and July 15 of each year, commencing July 15, 2012. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes were issued in a private offering that is exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act.
The Company used the proceeds from the offering, of approximately $918 million, to: (i) prepay $629 million of its non-extended term loan borrowings under its senior secured credit facility which were due to mature in October 2013, (ii) repay all of the $133 million in outstanding borrowings under its non-extended revolving credit facility which was due to mature in April 2013, and (iii) repay $156 million of the outstanding borrowings under its extended revolving credit facility. In conjunction with the repayments of $289 million described in clauses (ii) and (iii), the Company reduced the commitments under its non-extended revolving credit facility by a like amount, thereby terminating the non-extended revolving credit facility.
Additionally, the Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment provides that the First and a Half Lien Notes will not constitute senior secured debt for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio maintenance covenant under our senior secured credit facility. This facility requires Realogy to maintain a senior secured leverage ratio of total senior secured net debt to trailing 12-month Adjusted EBITDA (as defined in Note 8, “Short and Long-Term Debt”), that may not exceed 4.75 to 1.0. Realogy was in compliance with the senior secured leverage covenant with a senior secured leverage ratio of 4.44 to 1.0 at December 31, 2011. After giving effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, our senior secured leverage ratio would have been 3.87 to 1.0 at December 31, 2011. See Note 20 "Subsequent Events" for additional information related to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering.
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
CONSOLIDATION
Effective January 1, 2010, the Company adopted FASB’s amended guidance on the consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (“VIE”), in which the Company consolidates a VIE for which it is the primary beneficiary with a controlling financial interest. Also, the Company consolidates an entity not deemed a VIE if its ownership, direct or indirect, exceeds 50% of the outstanding voting shares of an entity and/or that it has the ability to control the financial or operating policies through its voting rights, board representation or other similar rights. For entities where the Company does not have a controlling interest (financial or operating), the investments in such entities are accounted for using the equity or cost method, as appropriate. The Company applies the equity method of accounting when it has the ability to exercise significant influence over operating and financial policies of an investee. The Company uses the cost method for all other investments.
Effective January 1, 2009, the Company adopted the FASB’s new guidance on noncontrolling interests which established requirements for ownership interests in subsidiaries held by parties other than the Company (“noncontrolling interest”) be clearly identified, presented and disclosed in the consolidated statement of financial position within equity, but
separate from the parent’s equity. The presentation and disclosure requirements in the guidance were applied retrospectively to comparative financial statements.
USE OF ESTIMATES
In presenting the consolidated financial statements, management makes estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported and related disclosures. Estimates, by their nature, are based on judgment and available information. Accordingly, actual results could differ materially from those estimates.
REVENUE RECOGNITION
Real Estate Franchise Services
The Company franchises its real estate brokerage franchise systems to real estate brokerage businesses that are independently owned and operated. The Company provides operational and administrative services and systems to franchisees, which include national and local advertising programs, systems and tools that are designed to help the Company's franchisees serve their customers and attract new or retain existing independent sales associates, training and volume purchasing discounts through the Company’s preferred vendor program. Franchise revenue principally consists of royalty and marketing fees from the Company’s franchisees. The royalty received is primarily based on a percentage of the franchisee’s gross commission income. Royalty fees are accrued as the underlying franchisee revenue is earned (upon close of the homesale transaction). Annual volume incentives given to certain franchisees on royalty fees are recorded as a reduction to revenue and are accrued for in relative proportion to the recognition of the underlying gross franchise revenue. Franchise revenue also includes initial franchise fees, which are generally non-refundable and recognized by the Company as revenue when all material services or conditions relating to the sale have been substantially performed (generally when a franchised unit opens for business). The Company also earns marketing fees from its franchisees and utilizes such fees to fund advertising campaigns on behalf of its franchisees.
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services
As an owner-operator of real estate brokerages, the Company assists home buyers and sellers in listing, marketing, selling and finding homes. Real estate commissions earned by the Company’s real estate brokerage business are recorded as revenue on a gross basis upon the closing of a real estate transaction (i.e., purchase or sale of a home), which are referred to as gross commission income. The commissions the Company pays to real estate agents are recognized concurrently with associated revenues and presented as commission and other agent-related costs line item on the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Relocation Services
The Company provides relocation services to corporate and government clients for the transfer of their employees. Such services include the purchasing and/or selling of a transferee’s home, providing home equity advances to transferees (generally guaranteed by the client), expense processing, arranging household goods moving services, home-finding and other related services. The Company earns revenues from fees charged to clients for the performance and/or facilitation of these services and recognizes such revenue as services are provided, except for limited instances in which the Company assumes the risk of loss on the sale of a transferring employee’s home (“at-risk”). In such cases, revenues are recorded as earned with associated costs recorded within operating expenses. In the majority of relocation transactions, the gain or loss on the sale of a transferee’s home is generally borne by the client. However, there are limited instances in which the Company assumes the risk of loss. Under “at-risk” contracts the Company records the value of the home on its Consolidated Balance Sheets within the relocation properties held for sale line item at the lower of cost or net realizable value less estimated direct costs to sell. The difference between the actual purchase price and proceeds received on the sale of the home is recorded within operating expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and the gain or loss was not material for any period presented. The aggregate selling price of such homes was $123 million, $170 million and $45 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Additionally, the Company generally earns interest income on the funds it advances on behalf of the transferring employee, which is recorded within other revenue (as is the corresponding interest expense on the securitization obligations) in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Company also earns referral revenue from real estate brokers, which is recognized at the time the underlying property closes, and revenues from other third-party service providers where the Company earns a referral fee or commission, which is recognized at the time of completion of services.
Title and Settlement Services
The Company provides title and closing services, which include title search procedures for title insurance policies, homesale escrow and other closing services. Title revenues, which are recorded net of amounts remitted to third party insurance underwriters, and title and closing service fees are recorded at the time a homesale transaction or refinancing closes. The Company also owns an underwriter of title insurance. For independent title agents, the underwriter recognizes policy premium revenue on a gross basis (before deduction of agent commission) upon notice of policy issuance from the agent. For affiliated title agents, the underwriter recognizes the incremental policy premium revenue upon the effective date of the title policy as the agent commission revenue is already recognized by the affiliated title agent.
ALLOWANCE FOR DOUBTFUL ACCOUNTS
The Company estimates the allowance necessary to provide for uncollectible accounts receivable. The estimate is based on historical experience, combined with a review of current developments and includes specific accounts for which payment has become unlikely. The process by which the Company calculates the allowance begins in the individual business units where specific problem accounts are identified and reserved primarily based upon the age profile of the receivables and specific payment issues.
ADVERTISING EXPENSES
Advertising costs are generally expensed in the period incurred. Advertising expenses, recorded within the marketing expense line item on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations, were approximately $164 million, $156 million and $161 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
INCOME TAXES
The Company’s operations were included in the consolidated federal tax return of Cendant up to the date of Separation. In addition, the Company filed consolidated and unitary state income tax returns with Cendant in jurisdictions where required or permitted. The income taxes associated with the Company’s inclusion in Cendant’s consolidated federal and state income tax returns are included in the due to former parent line item on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The Company’s provision for income taxes is determined using the asset and liability method, under which deferred tax assets and liabilities are calculated based upon the temporary differences between the financial statement and income tax bases of assets and liabilities using currently enacted tax rates. These differences are based upon estimated differences between the book and tax basis of the assets and liabilities for the Company. Certain tax assets and liabilities of the Company may be adjusted in connection with the finalization of income tax audits.
The Company’s deferred tax assets are recorded net of a valuation allowance when, based on the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that all or some portion of the recorded deferred tax balances will not be realized in future periods. Decreases to the valuation allowance are recorded as reductions to the Company’s provision for income taxes and increases to the valuation allowance result in additional provision for income taxes.
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
The Company considers highly-liquid investments with remaining maturities not exceeding three months at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents.
RESTRICTED CASH
Restricted cash primarily relates to amounts specifically designated as collateral for the repayment of outstanding borrowings under the Company’s securitization facilities. Such amounts approximated $7 million and $13 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively and are primarily included within Other current assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets.
DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS
The Company records derivatives and hedging activities on the balance sheet at their respective fair values. The accounting for changes in the fair value (i.e., gains or losses) of a derivative instrument is dependent upon whether the derivative has been designated and qualifies as part of a hedging relationship.
The Company uses foreign currency forward contracts largely to manage its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates associated with its foreign currency denominated receivables and payables. The Company primarily
manages its foreign currency exposure to the Swiss Franc, Canadian Dollar, British Pound and Euro. The Company has elected to not utilize hedge accounting for these forward contracts; therefore, any change in fair value is recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. However, the fluctuations in the value of these forward contracts generally offset the impact of changes in the value of the underlying risk that they are intended to economically hedge.
The Company also enters into interest rate swaps to manage its exposure to changes in interest rates associated with its variable rate borrowings. The Company has three interest rate swaps with an aggregate notional value of $650 million to hedge the variability in cash flows resulting from the term loan facility. One swap, with a notional value of $225 million, expires in July 2012, the second swap, with a notional value of $200 million, expires in December 2012 and the third swap, with a notional value of $225 million, commences in July 2012 and expires in October 2016. The Company is utilizing pay fixed interest swaps (in exchange for floating LIBOR rate based payments) to perform this hedging strategy. As of December 31, 2011, the Company has elected to not utilize hedge accounting for these interest rate swaps; therefore, any change in fair value is recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
INVESTMENTS
At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Company had various equity method investments aggregating $54 million and $48 million, respectively, which are primarily recorded within Other non-current assets on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. Included in such investments is a 49.9% interest in PHH Home Loans, a mortgage origination venture formed in 2005. This venture enables the Company to participate in the earnings generated from mortgages originated by customers of its real estate brokerage and relocation businesses. The Company’s maximum exposure to loss with respect to its investment in PHH Home Loans is limited to its equity investment of $47 million at December 31, 2011. See Note 13, “Separation Adjustments, Transactions with Former Parent and Subsidiaries and Related Parties” for a more detailed description of the Company’s relationship with PHH Home Loans.
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
Property and equipment (including leasehold improvements) are initially recorded at cost, net of accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation, recorded as a component of depreciation and amortization on the Consolidated Statements of Operations, is computed utilizing the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the related assets. Amortization of leasehold improvements, also recorded as a component of depreciation and amortization, is computed utilizing the straight-line method over the estimated benefit period of the related assets or the lease term, if shorter. Useful lives are 30 years for buildings, up to 20 years for leasehold improvements, and from 3 to 7 years for furniture, fixtures and equipment.
The Company capitalizes the costs of software developed for internal use which commences during the development phase of the project. The Company amortizes software developed or obtained for internal use on a straight-line basis, from 3 to 10 years, when such software is substantially ready for use. The net carrying value of software developed or obtained for internal use was $67 million and $76 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
IMPAIRMENT OF GOODWILL, INTANGIBLE ASSETS AND OTHER LONG-LIVED ASSETS
The Company assesses goodwill and other indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment annually, or more frequently if circumstances indicate impairment may have occurred. The Company performs its required annual impairment testing in the fourth quarter of each year subsequent to completing its annual forecasting process. Each of the Company’s operating segments represents a reporting unit.
The Company assesses goodwill for impairment by first comparing the carrying value of each reporting unit to its fair value using the present value of expected future cash flows. If the fair value is less than the carrying value, then the Company would perform a second test for that reporting unit to determine the amount of impairment loss, if any. The Company determines the fair value of its reporting units utilizing the Company’s best estimate of future revenues, operating expenses, cash flows, market and general economic conditions as well as assumptions that it believes marketplace participants would utilize, including discount rates, cost of capital, and long term growth rates. When available and as appropriate, the Company uses comparative market multiples and other factors to corroborate the discounted cash flow results. Other indefinite-lived intangible assets are tested for impairment and written down to fair value.
During the fourth quarter of 2011, 2010 and 2009, the Company performed its annual impairment analysis of goodwill and unamortized intangible assets. Based upon the analysis performed, there was no impairment. Management evaluated
the effect of lowering the estimated fair value for each of the reporting units by 10% and determined that no impairment of goodwill would have been recognized under this evaluation for 2011, 2010 or 2009.
The Company evaluates the recoverability of its other long-lived assets, including amortizable intangible assets, if circumstances indicate an impairment may have occurred. This analysis is performed by comparing the respective carrying values of the assets to the current and expected future cash flows, on an undiscounted basis, to be generated from such assets. Property and equipment is evaluated separately within each business unit. If such analysis indicates that the carrying value of these assets is not recoverable, then the carrying value of such assets is reduced to fair value through a charge to the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations. There were no impairments relating to other long-lived assets, including amortizable intangible assets, during 2011, 2010 or 2009.
SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION
Significant non-cash transactions in 2011, 2010 and 2009 included the Company’s election to satisfy the interest payment obligation by issuing $3 million, $51 million and $57 million, respectively, of Senior Toggle Notes which resulted in non-cash transfers between accrued interest and long-term debt.
STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to estimate the fair value of time vested stock options and a lattice based valuation model to estimate the fair value of performance based awards on the date of grant which requires certain estimates by management including the expected volatility and expected term of the option. Management also makes decisions regarding the risk-free interest rate used in the models and makes estimates regarding forfeiture rates. Fluctuations in the market that affect these estimates could have an impact on the resulting compensation cost. For non-performance based employee stock awards, the fair value of the compensation cost is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the award. Compensation cost for restricted stock (non-vested stock) is recorded based on its market value on the date of grant and is expensed in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations ratably over the vesting period.
RECENTLY ADOPTED ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In January 2010, the FASB expanded the disclosure requirements for fair value measurements relating to the transfers in and out of Level II measurements and amended the disclosures for the Level III activity reconciliation to be presented on a gross basis. In addition, valuation techniques and inputs should be disclosed for both Levels II and III recurring and nonrecurring measurements. The new requirements are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about the Level III activity reconciliation which are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010. The Company adopted the new disclosure requirements on January 1, 2010 except for the disclosure related to the Level III reconciliation, which was adopted on January 1, 2011. The adoption did not have a significant impact on the consolidated financial statements.
In December 2010, the FASB issued guidance to clarify when to perform step two of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. In certain situations, a reporting unit may have a negative carrying amount, particularly for companies that only have a single reporting unit and have significant debt. In that case, since the first step is passed, the negative carrying amount may shield a potential impairment. The guidance requires that reporting units with a zero or negative carrying value should proceed to step two of the impairment test if there are qualitative factors indicating that it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. This guidance is effective for all interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010. The Company adopted the guidance beginning January 1, 2011 and determined that the adoption did not have a significant impact on the consolidated financial statements.
In December 2010, the FASB issued guidance to clarify the disclosure of supplementary pro forma information for business combinations. Previous guidance on “Business Combinations” requires disclosure of revenue and earnings of the combined entity as if the acquisition had occurred as of the beginning of both the current period and the comparable prior year reporting period. However, presenting pro forma results as if the acquisition occurred at the beginning of each annual period inappropriately results in certain adjustments, such as amortization expense of intangible assets with useful lives of less than two years, being included in the pro forma results of both reporting periods. The new guidance therefore requires pro forma information to be prepared as if the acquisition occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior period and is applied prospectively for acquisitions consummated after the beginning of the fiscal year beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The Company adopted the guidance beginning January 1, 2011 and determined that the adoption did not have a significant impact on the consolidated financial statements.
In June 2011, the FASB amended the guidance on comprehensive income to allow companies an option to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income (“OCI”) either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. The amendments do not change the items that must be reported in OCI or when an item of OCI must be reclassified to net income (loss), nor do they change how earnings per share is calculated and presented. In addition, companies continue to have the option to present the OCI components net of tax or one amount reported for the tax effects of all OCI items. The amendments are effective retrospectively for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011 with early adoption permitted. The Company early adopted these amendments as of December 31, 2011 and has presented the required information in two separate but consecutive statements in accordance with the guidance.
RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In September 2011, the FASB amended the guidance on testing for goodwill impairment that allows an entity to elect to qualitatively assess whether it is necessary to perform the current two-step goodwill impairment test. If the qualitative assessment determines that it is not more-likely-than-not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step test is unnecessary. If the entity elects to bypass the qualitative assessment for any reporting unit and proceed directly to Step One of the test and validate the conclusion by measuring fair value, it can resume performing the qualitative assessment in any subsequent period. The amendments are effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company will consider utilizing the new qualitative analysis for its goodwill impairment test to be performed in the fourth quarter of 2012.
In May 2011, the FASB amended the guidance on Fair Value Measurement that result in common measurement of fair value and disclosure requirements between U.S. GAAP and the International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). The amendments mainly change the wording used to describe many of the requirements in U.S. GAAP for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements. The amendments are effective prospectively for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The Company adopted the amendments on January 1, 2012 and the adoption did not have a significant impact on the consolidated financial statements.
Assets acquired and liabilities assumed in business combinations were recorded in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of the respective acquisition dates based upon their estimated fair values at such dates. The results of operations of businesses acquired by the Company have been included in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations since their respective dates of acquisition.
In connection with the Company’s acquisition of real estate brokerage operations, the Company obtains contractual pendings and listings intangible assets, which represent the estimated fair value of homesale transactions that are pending closing or homes listed for sale by the acquired brokerage operations. Pendings and listings intangible assets are amortized over the estimated closing period of the underlying contracts and homes listed for sale, which in most cases, is approximately 5 months.
2011 ACQUISITIONS
During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company acquired thirteen real estate brokerage operations through its wholly-owned subsidiary, NRT, for total consideration of $4 million. These acquisitions resulted in goodwill of $3 million that was assigned to the Company Owned Brokerage Services segment.
None of the 2011 acquisitions were significant to the Company’s results of operations, financial position or cash flows individually or in the aggregate.
2010 ACQUISITIONS
On January 21, 2010, the Company completed the stock acquisition of Primacy for the assumption of approximately $26 million of indebtedness (excluding $9 million of indebtedness related to the sale of relocation receivables). Primacy was a relocation and global assignment management services company headquartered in the U.S. with international locations in Canada, Europe and Asia. The acquisition of Primacy increased goodwill by $16 million, customer relationships intangibles by $62 million and other intangibles by $5 million. Effective January 1, 2011, the Primacy business operates under the Cartus name.
During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company acquired nine real estate brokerage operations through its wholly-owned subsidiary, NRT, for a total consideration of $24 million. These acquisitions resulted in goodwill of $20 million and $2 million of pendings and listings intangible assets that was assigned to the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment.
None of the 2010 acquisitions were significant to the Company’s results of operations, financial position or cash flows individually or in the aggregate.
2009 ACQUISITIONS
During the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company acquired seven real estate brokerage operations through its wholly-owned subsidiary, NRT, for a total consideration of approximately $4 million. These acquisitions resulted in goodwill of $4 million that was assigned to the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment.
None of the 2009 acquisitions were significant to the Company’s results of operations, financial position or cash flows individually or in the aggregate.
Goodwill by segment and changes in the carrying amount are as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Real Estate Franchise Services | | Company Owned Brokerage Services | | Relocation Services | | Title and Settlement Services | | Total Company |
Goodwill balance at January 1, 2009 | 2,241 |
| | 600 |
| | 344 |
| | 72 |
| | 3,257 |
|
Goodwill acquired | — |
| | 4 |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | 5 |
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 | 2,241 |
| | 604 |
| | 344 |
| | 73 |
| | 3,262 |
|
Goodwill acquired (a) | — |
| | 20 |
| | 16 |
| | — |
| | 36 |
|
Goodwill reduction for locations sold | — |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) |
Balance at December 31, 2010 | 2,241 |
| | 622 |
| | 360 |
| | 73 |
| | 3,296 |
|
Goodwill acquired | — |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3 |
|
Balance at December 31, 2011 | $ | 2,241 |
| | $ | 625 |
| | $ | 360 |
| | $ | 73 |
| | $ | 3,299 |
|
Goodwill and accumulated impairment summary | | | | | | | | | |
Gross Goodwill as of December 31, 2011 | $ | 3,264 |
| | $ | 783 |
| | $ | 641 |
| | $ | 397 |
| | $ | 5,085 |
|
Accumulated impairment losses (b) | (1,023 | ) | | (158 | ) | | (281 | ) | | (324 | ) | | (1,786 | ) |
Balance at December 31, 2011 | $ | 2,241 |
| | $ | 625 |
| | $ | 360 |
| | $ | 73 |
| | $ | 3,299 |
|
_______________
| |
(a) | The increase in goodwill relates to acquisitions of real estate brokerages and the acquisition of Primacy. |
| |
(b) | During the fourth quarter of 2008, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $1,557 million which reduced intangible assets by $278 million and reduced goodwill by $1,279 million. During the fourth quarter of 2007, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $637 million which reduced intangible assets by $130 million and reduced goodwill by $507 million. |
During the fourth quarter of 2011, 2010 and 2009, the Company performed its annual impairment analysis of goodwill and unamortized intangible assets. These analyses resulted in no impairment charges.
Intangible assets are as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| As of December 31, 2011 | | As of December 31, 2010 |
| Gross Carrying Amount | | Accumulated Amortization | | Net Carrying Amount | | Gross Carrying Amount | | Accumulated Amortization | | Net Carrying Amount |
Amortizable—Franchise agreements (a) | $ | 2,019 |
| | $ | 322 |
| | $ | 1,697 |
| | $ | 2,019 |
| | $ | 255 |
| | $ | 1,764 |
|
Unamortizable—Trademarks (b) | $ | 732 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 732 |
| | $ | 732 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 732 |
|
Other Intangibles | | | | | | | | | | | |
Amortizable—License agreements (c) | $ | 45 |
| | $ | 4 |
| | $ | 41 |
| | $ | 45 |
| | $ | 3 |
| | $ | 42 |
|
Amortizable—Customer relationships (d) | 529 |
| | 144 |
| | 385 |
| | 529 |
| | 107 |
| | 422 |
|
Amortizable—Pendings and listings (e) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 1 |
|
Unamortizable—Title plant shares (f) | 10 |
| | — |
| | 10 |
| | 10 |
| | — |
| | 10 |
|
Amortizable—Other (g) | 17 |
| | 14 |
| | 3 |
| | 12 |
| | 9 |
| | 3 |
|
Total Other Intangibles | $ | 601 |
| | $ | 162 |
| | $ | 439 |
| | $ | 598 |
| | $ | 120 |
| | $ | 478 |
|
_______________(a) Generally amortized over a period of 30 years.
| |
(b) | Relates to the Century 21, Coldwell Banker, ERA, The Corcoran Group, Coldwell Banker Commercial and Cartus tradenames, which are expected to generate future cash flows for an indefinite period of time. |
| |
(c) | Relates to the Sotheby’s International Realty and Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate agreements which are being amortized over 50 years (the contractual term of the license agreements). |
| |
(d) | Relates to the customer relationships at the Title and Settlement Services segment and the Relocation Services segment. These relationships are being amortized over a period of 5 to 20 years. |
| |
(e) | Amortized over the estimated closing period of the underlying contracts (in most cases five months). |
| |
(f) | Primarily related to the Texas American Title Company title plant shares. Ownership in a title plant is required to transact title insurance in certain states. The Company expects to generate future cash flows for an indefinite period of time. |
| |
(g) | Generally amortized over periods ranging from 2 to 10 years. |
Intangible asset amortization expense is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Franchise agreements | 67 |
| | 67 |
| | 67 |
|
License agreement | 1 |
| | — |
| | 1 |
|
Customer relationships | 37 |
| | 37 |
| | 25 |
|
Pendings and listings | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 1 |
|
Other | 5 |
| | 6 |
| | 1 |
|
Total | 112 |
| | 111 |
| | 95 |
|
Based on the Company’s amortizable intangible assets as of December 31, 2011, the Company expects related amortization expense to be approximately $107 million, $105 million, $105 million, $95 million, $95 million and $1,619 million in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and thereafter, respectively.
| |
5. | FRANCHISING AND MARKETING ACTIVITIES |
Franchise fee revenue includes domestic initial franchise fees and international area development fees of $9 million, $6 million, and $6 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. In addition, franchise fee revenue is net of annual volume incentives provided to real estate franchisees of $25 million, $24 million and $25 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The Company’s real estate franchisees may receive volume incentives on their royalty payments. Such annual incentives are based upon the amount of commission income earned and paid during a calendar year. Each brand has several different annual incentive schedules currently in effect.
The Company’s wholly-owned real estate brokerage services segment, NRT, pays royalties to the Company’s franchise business; however, such amounts are eliminated in consolidation. NRT paid royalties to the Real Estate Franchise Services segment of $204 million, $206 million and $202 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Marketing fees are generally paid by the Company’s real estate franchisees and are calculated based on a specified percentage of gross closed commissions earned on the sale of real estate, subject to certain minimum and maximum payments. Such fees are recorded within Other revenues on the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations. As provided for in the franchise agreements and generally at the Company’s discretion, all of these fees are to be expended for marketing purposes.
The number of franchised and company owned outlets in operation are as follows:
|
| | | | | |
| (Unaudited) As of December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Franchised: | | | | | |
Century 21® | 7,475 | | 7,955 | | 7,711 |
ERA® | 2,364 | | 2,488 | | 2,621 |
Coldwell Banker® | 2,485 | | 2,583 | | 2,648 |
Coldwell Banker Commercial® | 175 | | 181 | | 212 |
Sotheby’s International Realty® | 573 | | 531 | | 470 |
Better Homes and Gardens® Real Estate | 210 | | 201 | | 103 |
| 13,282 | | 13,939 | | 13,765 |
Company Owned: | | | | | |
ERA® | 10 | | 11 | | 11 |
Coldwell Banker® | 649 | | 669 | | 676 |
Sotheby’s International Realty® | 30 | | 31 | | 36 |
Corcoran®/Other | 35 | | 35 | | 35 |
| 724 | | 746 | | 758 |
The number of franchised and company owned outlets (in the aggregate) changed as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | |
| (Unaudited) For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Franchised: | | | | | |
Beginning balance | 13,939 |
| | 13,765 |
| | 14,794 |
|
Additions | 335 |
| | 1,269 |
| | 452 |
|
Terminations | (992 | ) | | (1,095 | ) | | (1,481 | ) |
Ending Balance | 13,282 |
| | 13,939 |
| | 13,765 |
|
Company Owned: | | | | | |
Beginning balance | 746 |
| | 758 |
| | 835 |
|
Additions | 10 |
| | 20 |
| | 7 |
|
Closures | (32 | ) | | (32 | ) | | (84 | ) |
Ending Balance | 724 |
| | 746 |
| | 758 |
|
As of December 31, 2011, there were an insignificant amount of franchise agreements that have been executed, but for which offices are not yet operating. Additionally, as of December 31, 2011, there were an insignificant number of franchise agreements pending termination.
In connection with ongoing fees the Company receives from its franchisees pursuant to the franchise agreements, the Company is required to provide certain services, such as training and marketing. In order to assist franchisees in converting to one of the Company’s brands or in franchise expansion, the Company may also, at its discretion, provide conversion notes to franchisees who are either new or who are expanding their operations. Prior to 2009, the Company issued development advance notes. Provided the franchisee meets certain minimum annual revenue thresholds during the term of the notes, and is in compliance with the terms of the franchise agreement, the amount of the note is forgiven annually in equal ratable amounts over the life of the franchise agreement. Otherwise, related principal is due and payable to the Company. The amount of such franchisee conversion notes and development advance notes were $90 million, net of $14 million of reserves, and $85 million, net of $20 million of reserves, at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. These notes are
principally classified within Other non-current assets in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Company recorded an income statement charge related to the forgiveness of these notes of $13 million, $13 million and $13 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
| |
6. | PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, NET |
Property and equipment, net consisted of:
|
| | | | | | | |
| December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
Furniture, fixtures and equipment | $ | 175 |
| | $ | 161 |
|
Capitalized software | 225 |
| | 208 |
|
Building and leasehold improvements | 131 |
| | 127 |
|
Land | 4 |
| | 4 |
|
| 535 |
| | 500 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization | (370 | ) | | (314 | ) |
| $ | 165 |
| | $ | 186 |
|
The Company recorded depreciation and amortization expense related to property and equipment of $74 million, $86 million and $99 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
| |
7. | ACCRUED EXPENSES AND OTHER CURRENT LIABILITIES |
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities consisted of:
|
| | | | | | | |
| December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
Accrued payroll and related employee costs | $ | 69 |
| | $ | 93 |
|
Accrued volume incentives | 17 |
| | 17 |
|
Accrued commissions | 14 |
| | 15 |
|
Restructuring accruals | 20 |
| | 36 |
|
Deferred income | 76 |
| | 76 |
|
Accrued interest | 139 |
| | 112 |
|
Relocation services home mortgage obligations | 9 |
| | 16 |
|
Other | 176 |
| | 160 |
|
| $ | 520 |
| | $ | 525 |
|
| |
8. | SHORT AND LONG-TERM DEBT |
Total indebtedness is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | |
| December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
Senior Secured Credit Facility: | | | |
Non-extended revolving credit facility | $ | 78 |
| | $ | — |
|
Extended revolving credit facility | 97 |
| | — |
|
Non-extended term loan facility | 629 |
| | 3,059 |
|
Extended term loan facility | 1,822 |
| | — |
|
First and a Half Lien Notes | 700 |
| | — |
|
Second Lien Loans | 650 |
| | 650 |
|
Other bank indebtedness | 133 |
| | 163 |
|
Existing Notes: | | | |
10.50% Senior Notes | 64 |
| | 1,688 |
|
11.00%/11.75% Senior Toggle Notes | 52 |
| | 468 |
|
12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes | 187 |
| | 864 |
|
Extended Maturity Notes: | | | |
11.50% Senior Notes | 489 |
| | — |
|
12.00% Senior Notes | 129 |
| | — |
|
13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes | 10 |
| | — |
|
11.00% Convertible Notes | 2,110 |
| | — |
|
Securitization Obligations: | | | |
Apple Ridge Funding LLC | 296 |
| | 296 |
|
Cartus Financing Limited | 31 |
| | 35 |
|
| $ | 7,477 |
| | $ | 7,223 |
|
Indebtedness Table
As of December 31, 2011, the total capacity, outstanding borrowings and available capacity under the Company’s borrowing arrangements were as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest Rate | | Expiration Date | | Total Capacity | | Outstanding Borrowings | | Available Capacity |
Senior Secured Credit Facility: | | | | | | | | | |
Non-extended revolving credit facility (1) | (2) | | April 2013 | | $ | 289 |
| | $ | 78 |
| | $ | 158 |
|
Extended revolving credit facility (1) | (2) | | April 2016 | | 363 |
| | 97 |
| | 200 |
|
Non-extended term loan facility | (3) | | October 2013 | | 629 |
| | 629 |
| | — |
|
Extended term loan facility | (3) | | October 2016 | | 1,822 |
| | 1,822 |
| | — |
|
Existing First and a Half Lien Notes | 7.875% | | February 2019 | | 700 |
| | 700 |
| | — |
|
Second Lien Loans | 13.50% | | October 2017 | | 650 |
| | 650 |
| | — |
|
Other bank indebtedness (4) | | | Various | | 133 |
| | 133 |
| | — |
|
Existing Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
Senior Notes | 10.50% | | April 2014 | | 64 |
| | 64 |
| | — |
|
Senior Toggle Notes | 11.00% | | April 2014 | | 52 |
| | 52 |
| | — |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes (5) | 12.375% | | April 2015 | | 190 |
| | 187 |
| | — |
|
Extended Maturity Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
Senior Notes (6) | 11.50% | | April 2017 | | 492 |
| | 489 |
| | — |
|
Senior Notes (7) | 12.00% | | April 2017 | | 130 |
| | 129 |
| | — |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes | 13.375% | | April 2018 | | 10 |
| | 10 |
| | — |
|
Convertible Notes | 11.00% | | April 2018 | | 2,110 |
| | 2,110 |
| | — |
|
Securitization obligations: (8) | | | | | | | | | |
Apple Ridge Funding LLC | | | December 2013 | | 400 |
| | 296 |
| | 104 |
|
Cartus Financing Limited (9) | | | Various | | 62 |
| | 31 |
| | 31 |
|
| | | | | $ | 8,096 |
| | $ | 7,477 |
| | $ | 493 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | The available capacity under these facilities was reduced by $53 million and $66 million of outstanding letters of credit on the non-extended and the extended revolving credit facility, respectively, at December 31, 2011. On February 2, 2012, the Company completed the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering (described below) which, among other things, terminated availability under the non-extended revolving credit facility. On February 27, 2012, the Company had $55 million outstanding on the extended revolving credit facility and $81 million of outstanding letters of credit. |
| |
(2) | Interest rates with respect to revolving loans under the senior secured credit facility are based on, at Realogy’s option, adjusted LIBOR plus 2.25% (or with respect to the extended revolving loans, 3.25%) or ABR plus 1.25% (or with respect to the extended revolving loans, 2.25%) in each case subject to reductions based on the attainment of certain leverage ratios. |
| |
(3) | Interest rates with respect to term loans under the senior secured credit facility are based on, at Realogy’s option, (a) adjusted LIBOR plus 3.0% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 4.25%) or (b) the higher of the Federal Funds Effective Rate plus 0.5% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 1.75%) and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s prime rate (“ABR”) plus 2.0% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 3.25%). |
| |
(4) | Consists of revolving credit facilities that are supported by letters of credit issued under the senior secured credit facility, $75 million due in July 2012, $8 million due in August 2012 and $50 million due in January 2013. In January 2012, Realogy repaid $25 million of the outstanding borrowings and reduced the capacity of the credit facility due in July 2012 by $25 million. |
| |
(5) | Consists of $190 million of 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2015, less a discount of $3 million. |
| |
(6) | Consists of $492 million of 11.50% Senior Notes due 2017, less a discount of $3 million. |
| |
(7) | Consists of $130 million of 12.00% Senior Notes due 2017, less a discount of $1 million. |
| |
(8) | Available capacity is subject to maintaining sufficient relocation related assets to collateralize these securitization obligations. |
| |
(9) | Consists of a £35 million facility which expires in August 2015 and a £5 million working capital facility which expires in August 2012. |
2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering
On February 2, 2012, Realogy issued $593 million of First Lien Notes and $325 million of New First and a Half Lien Notes, the proceed of which were used to repay amounts outstanding under its senior secured credit facility. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are senior secured obligations of the Company and will mature on January 15, 2020. Interest is payable semiannually on January 15 and July 15 of each year, commencing July 15, 2012. See Note 20, "Subsequent Events" for additional information related to these transactions.
2011 Refinancing Transactions
In January and February of 2011, Realogy completed a series of transactions, referred to herein as the “2011 Refinancing Transactions,” to refinance portions of its senior secured credit facility and unsecured notes.
Debt Exchange Offering
On January 5, 2011, we completed private exchange offers under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), relating to its outstanding Existing Notes (the “Debt Exchange Offering”). As a result of the Debt Exchange Offering, $2,110 million of Existing Notes were tendered for Convertible Notes, $632 million of Existing Notes were tendered for Extended Maturity Notes and $303 million of Existing Notes remained outstanding.
Amendment to Senior Secured Credit Facility
Effective February 3, 2011, we entered into a first amendment to our senior secured credit facility (the “Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment”) and an incremental assumption agreement, which resulted in the following: (i) extended the maturity of a significant portion of our first lien term loans to October 10, 2016 and increased the interest rate with respect to the extended term loans; (ii) extended the maturity of a significant portion of the loans and commitments under our revolving credit facility to April 10, 2016, increased the interest rate with respect to the extended revolving loans and converted a portion of the extended revolving loans to extended term loans ($98 million in the aggregate); (iii) extended the maturity of a significant portion of the commitments under our synthetic letter of credit facility to October 10, 2016 and increased the fee with respect to the extended synthetic letter of credit commitments; and (iv) allowed for the issuance of $700 million aggregate principal amount of Existing First and a Half Lien Notes, the net proceeds of which, along with cash on hand, were used to prepay $700 million of the outstanding extended term loans. The Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment also provides for the incurrence of additional incremental term loans that are secured on a junior basis to the second lien loans in an aggregate amount not to exceed $350 million.
Issuance of Existing First and a Half Lien Notes
On February 3, 2011, the Company issued $700 million aggregate principal amount of Existing First and a Half Lien Notes in a private offering exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act. The Existing First and a Half Lien Notes are secured by substantially the same collateral as the Company’s existing secured obligations under its senior secured credit facility, but the priority of the collateral liens securing the Existing First and a Half Lien Notes is (i) junior to the collateral liens securing the Company’s first lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility and (ii) senior to the collateral liens securing the Company’s second lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility. The Existing First and a Half Lien Notes mature on February 1, 2019 and bear interest at a rate of 7.875% per annum, payable semiannually on February 15 and August 15 of each year.
As discussed above, the net proceeds from the offering of the First and a Half Lien Notes, along with cash on hand, were used to prepay $700 million of certain of the first lien term loans that were extended in connection with the Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment.
Senior Secured Credit Facility
Realogy has a senior secured credit facility which consists of (i) term loan facilities, (ii) revolving credit facilities, (iii) a synthetic letter of credit facility (the facilities described in clauses (i), (ii) and (iii), as amended by the Senior Secured Credit Facility Amendment, collectively referred to as the “First Lien Facilities”), and (iv) an incremental (or accordion) loan facility, a portion of which was utilized in connection with the incurrence of Second Lien Loans in 2009 as described below.
The extended term loans do not require any scheduled amortization of principal. The non-extended term loan facility will continue to provide for quarterly amortization payments totaling 1% per annum of the principal amount of the non-extended term loans.
Realogy uses the revolving credit facility for, among other things, working capital and other general corporate purposes. The loans under the First Lien Facilities (the “First Lien Loans”) are secured to the extent legally permissible by substantially all of the assets of Realogy, Intermediate and the subsidiary guarantors, including but not limited to (i) a first-priority pledge of substantially all capital stock held by Realogy or any subsidiary guarantor (which pledge, with respect to obligations in respect of the borrowings secured by a pledge of the stock of any first-tier foreign subsidiary, is limited to 100% of the non-voting stock (if any) and 65% of the voting stock of such foreign subsidiary), and (ii) perfected first-priority security interests in substantially all tangible and intangible assets of Realogy and each subsidiary guarantor, subject to certain exceptions.
In late 2009, Realogy incurred $650 million of Second Lien Loans (the "Second Lien Loans"). The Second Lien Loans are secured by liens on the assets of Realogy and by the guarantors that secure the First Lien Loans. However, such liens are junior in priority to the First Lien Loans and the First and a Half Lien Notes. The Second Lien Loans interest payments are payable semi-annually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The Second Lien Loans mature on October 15, 2017 and there are no required amortization payments.
The senior secured credit facility also provides for a synthetic letter of credit facility which is for: (i) the support of Realogy’s obligations with respect to Cendant contingent and other liabilities assumed under the Separation and Distribution Agreement and (ii) general corporate purposes in an amount not to exceed $100 million. The synthetic letter of credit facility capacity is $187 million at December 31, 2011, of which $43 million will expire in October 2013 and $144 million will expire in October 2016. As of December 31, 2011, the capacity was being utilized by a $70 million letter of credit with Cendant for any remaining potential contingent obligations and $100 million of letters of credit for general corporate purposes.
Realogy’s senior secured credit facility contains financial, affirmative and negative covenants and requires Realogy to maintain a senior secured leverage ratio not to exceed a maximum amount on the last day of each fiscal quarter. Specifically, Realogy’s total senior secured net debt to trailing twelve month EBITDA may not exceed 4.75 to 1.0. EBITDA, as defined in the senior secured credit facility, includes certain adjustments and is calculated on a “pro forma” basis for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio. In this report, the Company refers to the term “Adjusted EBITDA” to mean EBITDA as so defined for purposes of determining compliance with the senior secured leverage covenant. Total senior secured net debt does not include the First and a Half Lien Notes, Second Lien Loans, other bank indebtedness not secured by a first lien on Realogy or its subsidiaries assets, securitization obligations or the Unsecured Notes (as defined below). At December 31, 2011, Realogy’s senior secured leverage ratio was 4.44 to 1.0. After giving effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering, Realogy's senior secured leverage ratio would have been 3.87 to 1.0 at December 31, 2011.
Based upon Realogy’s financial forecast, Realogy believes that it will continue to be in compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio during the next twelve months. While the housing market has shown signs of stabilization, there remains substantial uncertainty with respect to the timing and scope of a housing recovery and if a housing recovery is delayed or is weak, Realogy may be subject to additional pressure in maintaining compliance with its senior secured leverage ratio.
To maintain compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio for the twelve-month periods ending March 31, 2012, June 30, 2012, September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2012 (or to avoid an event of default thereof), the Company will need to achieve a certain amount of Adjusted EBITDA and/or reduced levels of total senior secured net debt. The factors that will impact the foregoing include: (a) changes in sales volume and/or the price of existing homesales, (b) the ability to continue to implement cost-savings and business productivity enhancement initiatives, (c) increasing new franchise sales, sales associate recruitment and/or brokerage and other acquisitions, (d) obtaining additional equity financing from our parent company, (e) obtaining additional debt or equity financing from third party sources, or (f) a combination thereof. Factors (b) through (e) may be insufficient to overcome macroeconomic conditions affecting the Company.
Realogy has the right to cure an event of default of the senior secured leverage ratio in three of any of the four consecutive quarters through the issuance of additional Holdings equity for cash, which would be infused as capital into Realogy. The effect of such infusion would be to increase Adjusted EBITDA for purposes of calculating the senior secured leverage ratio for the applicable twelve-month period and reduce net senior secured indebtedness upon actual receipt of such capital. If Realogy is unable to maintain compliance with the senior secured leverage ratio and fails to remedy a default through an equity cure as described above, there would be an “event of default” under the senior secured credit facility. Other events of default under the senior secured credit facility include, without limitation, nonpayment, material misrepresentations, insolvency, bankruptcy, certain material judgments, change of control and cross-events of default on material indebtedness.
If an event of default occurs under the senior secured credit facility, and Realogy fails to obtain a waiver from the lenders, Realogy’s financial condition, results of operations and business would be materially adversely affected. Upon the occurrence of an event of default under the senior secured credit facility, the lenders:
| |
• | would not be required to lend any additional amounts to Realogy; |
| |
• | could elect to declare all borrowings outstanding, together with accrued and unpaid interest and fees, to be due and payable; |
| |
• | could require Realogy to apply all of its available cash to repay these borrowings; or |
| |
• | could prevent Realogy from making payments on the First and a Half Lien Notes or the Unsecured Notes; |
any of which could result in an event of default under the First and a Half Lien Notes, the Unsecured Notes and the Company’s Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program.
Other Bank Indebtedness
Realogy has separate revolving U.S. credit facilities under which it could borrow up to $125 million at December 31, 2011 and $155 million at December 31, 2010 and a separate U.K. credit facility under which it could borrow up to £5 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010. These facilities are not secured by assets of Realogy or any of its subsidiaries but are supported by letters of credit issued under the senior secured credit facility. The facilities generally have a one-year term with certain options for renewal. As of December 31, 2011, Realogy had outstanding borrowings of $133 million under these credit facilities with $75 million due in July 2012, $8 million due in August 2012 and $50 million due in January 2013. In January 2012, Realogy repaid $25 million of the outstanding borrowings and reduced the capacity of the credit facility due in July 2012 by $25 million. For the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, the weighted average interest rate under the U.S. credit facilities was 2.9% and 3.0%, respectively, and under the U.K. credit facility was 2.5% and 2.5%, respectively, with interest payable either monthly or quarterly.
Unsecured Notes
On April 10, 2007, Realogy issued $1,700 million of Senior Notes, $550 million of Senior Toggle Notes and $875 million of Senior Subordinated Notes.
On January 5, 2011, Realogy consummated the Debt Exchange Offering for a portion of its Existing Notes pursuant to which Realogy issued the Extended Maturity Notes and three series of Convertible Notes. Pursuant to the Debt Exchange
Offering, $2,110 million aggregate principal amount of the Existing Notes were tendered for Convertible Notes, which are convertible at the holder’s option into Class A Common Stock, and $632 million aggregate principal amount of the Existing Notes were tendered for the Extended Maturity Notes.
As a result of the Debt Exchange Offering, Realogy extended the maturity of $2,742 million aggregate principal amount of the Unsecured Notes to 2017 and 2018, leaving $303 million aggregate principal amount of Existing Notes that mature in 2014 and 2015. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the indenture governing the terms of the Convertible Notes, the Convertible Notes are redeemable at Realogy’s option at a price equal to 90% of the principal amount thereof, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption upon a Qualified Public Offering.
The 10.50% Senior Notes mature on April 15, 2014 and bear interest payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The 11.50% Senior Notes mature on April 15, 2017 and bear interest payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year.
The Senior Toggle Notes mature on April 15, 2014. Interest is payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. For any interest payment period after the initial interest payment period and through October 15, 2011, Realogy had the option to pay interest on the Senior Toggle Notes (i) entirely in cash (“Cash Interest”), (ii) entirely by increasing the principal amount of the outstanding Senior Toggle Notes or by issuing Senior Toggle Notes (“PIK Interest”), or (iii) 50% as Cash Interest and 50% as PIK Interest. Cash Interest on the Senior Toggle Notes accrues at a rate of 11.00% per annum. PIK Interest on the Senior Toggle Notes accrues at the Cash Interest rate per annum plus 0.75%. Beginning with the interest period which ended October 2008 through the interest period which ended April 2011, Realogy elected to satisfy its interest payment obligations by issuing additional Senior Toggle Notes. Realogy elected to pay Cash Interest for the interest period commencing April 15, 2011 and is required to make all future interest payments on the Senior Toggle Notes entirely in cash until they mature.
Realogy would be subject to certain interest deduction limitations if the Senior Toggle Notes were treated as “applicable high yield discount obligations” (“AHYDO”) within the meaning of Section 163(i)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended. In order to avoid such treatment, Realogy is required to redeem for cash a portion of each Senior Toggle Note then outstanding at the end of the accrual period ending in April 2012. The portion of a Senior Toggle Note required to be redeemed is an amount equal to the excess of the accrued original issue discount as of the end of such accrual period, less the amount of interest paid in cash on or before such date, less the first-year yield (the issue price of the debt instrument multiplied by its yield to maturity). For the periods that Realogy elected to pay PIK Interest, Realogy will be required to repay approximately $11 million in April 2012.
The 12.00% Senior Notes mature on April 15, 2017 and bear interest payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes mature on April 15, 2015 and bear interest payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The 13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes mature on April 15, 2018 and bear interest payable on April 15 and October 15 of each year.
The Senior Notes are guaranteed on an unsecured senior basis, and the Senior Subordinated Notes are guaranteed on an unsecured senior subordinated basis, in each case, by each of Realogy’s existing and future U.S. subsidiaries that is a guarantor under the senior secured credit facility or that guarantees certain other indebtedness in the future, subject to certain exceptions. The Senior Notes are guaranteed by Holdings on an unsecured senior subordinated basis and the Senior Subordinated Notes are guaranteed by Holdings on an unsecured junior subordinated basis.
On June 24, 2011, Realogy completed offers of exchange notes for Extended Maturity Notes issued in the Debt Exchange Offering. The term “exchange notes” refers to the 11.50% Senior Notes due 2017, the 12.00% Senior Notes due 2017 and the 13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2018, all as registered under the Securities Act, pursuant to a Registration Statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-173254 declared effective by the SEC on May 20, 2011). Each series of the exchange notes are substantially identical in all material respects to the Extended Maturity Notes of the applicable series issued in the Debt Exchange Offering (except that the new registered exchange notes do not contain terms with respect to additional interest or transfer restrictions). Unless the context otherwise requires, the term “Extended Maturity Notes” refers to the exchange notes.
Convertible Notes
The Series A Convertible Notes, Series B Convertible Notes and Series C Convertible Notes mature on April 15, 2018 and bear interest at a rate per annum of 11.00% payable semiannually on April 15 and October 15 of each year. The Convertible Notes are convertible into Class A Common Stock at any time prior to April 15, 2018. The Series A Convertible
Notes and Series B Convertible Notes are initially convertible into 39.0244 shares of Class A Common Stock per $1,000 aggregate principal amount of Series A Convertible Notes and Series B Convertible Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $25.625 per share, and the Series C Convertible Notes are initially convertible into 37.0714 shares of Class A Common Stock per $1,000 aggregate principal amount of Series C Convertible Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $26.975 per share, subject to adjustment if specified distributions to holders of the Class A Common Stock are made or specified corporate transactions occur, in each case as set forth in the indenture governing the Convertible Notes. The Convertible Notes are guaranteed on an unsecured senior subordinated basis by each of Realogy’s existing and future U.S. subsidiaries that is a guarantor under the senior secured credit facility or that guarantees certain other indebtedness in the future, subject to certain exceptions. The Convertible Notes are guaranteed on an unsecured junior subordinated basis by Holdings.
Following a Qualified Public Offering, Realogy may, at its option, redeem the Convertible Notes, in whole or in part, at a redemption price, payable in cash, equal to 90% of the principal amount of the Convertible Notes to be redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon to, but excluding, the redemption date.
On June 16, 2011, the SEC declared effective a Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-173250) of Holdings and Realogy, registering for resale the outstanding Convertible Notes and the Class A Common Stock of Holdings issuable upon conversion of the Convertible Notes. Offers and sales of the Convertible Notes and Class A Common Stock may be made by selling securityholders pursuant to the June 2011 Final Prospectus as amended or supplemented from time to time.
Loss (Gain) on the Early Extinguishment of Debt and Write-off of Deferred Financing Costs
As a result of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions, the Company recorded a loss on the early extinguishment of debt of $36 million and wrote off deferred financing costs of $7 million to interest expense as a result of debt modifications during the year ended December 31, 2011.
On September 24, 2009, Realogy and certain affiliates of Apollo entered into an agreement with a third party pursuant to which Realogy exchanged approximately $221 million aggregate principal amount of Senior Toggle Notes held by it for $150 million aggregate principal amount of Second Lien Loans. The third party also sold the balance of the Senior Toggle Notes it held for cash to an affiliate of Apollo in a privately negotiated transaction and used a portion of the cash proceeds to participate as a lender in the Second Lien Loan transaction. The transaction with the third party closed concurrently with the initial closing of the Second Lien Loans. As a result of the exchange, the Company recorded a gain on the extinguishment of debt of $75 million.
Securitization Obligations
Realogy has secured obligations through Apple Ridge Funding LLC, a securitization program which was due to expire in April 2012. On December 14, 2011, Realogy entered into agreements to amend and extend the existing Apple Ridge Funding LLC securitization program. The maturity date has been extended until December 2013. The maximum borrowing capacity remained at $400 million.
In 2010, Realogy, through a special purpose entity, Cartus Financing Limited, entered into agreements providing for a £35 million revolving loan facility which expires in August 2015 and a £5 million working capital facility which expires in August 2012. These Cartus Financing Limited facilities are secured by relocation assets of a U.K. government contract in a special purpose entity and are therefore classified as permitted securitization financings as defined in Realogy’s senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing the Unsecured Notes.
The Apple Ridge entities and Cartus Financing Limited entity are consolidated special purpose entities that are utilized to securitize relocation receivables and related assets. These assets are generated from advancing funds on behalf of clients of Realogy’s relocation business in order to facilitate the relocation of their employees. Assets of these special purpose entities are not available to pay Realogy’s general obligations. Under the Apple Ridge program, provided no termination or amortization event has occurred, any new receivables generated under the designated relocation management agreements are sold into the securitization program and as new eligible relocation management agreements are entered into, the new agreements are designated to the program. The Apple Ridge program has restrictive covenants and trigger events, including performance triggers linked to the age and quality of the underlying assets, foreign obligor limits, multicurrency limits, financial reporting requirements, restrictions on mergers and change of control, breach of Realogy’s senior secured leverage ratio under Realogy’s senior secured credit facility if uncured, and cross-defaults to Realogy’s credit agreement, unsecured and secured notes or other material indebtedness. The occurrence of a trigger event under the Apple Ridge securitization
facility could restrict our ability to access new or existing funding under this facility or result in termination of the facility, either of which would adversely affect the operation of our relocation business.
Certain of the funds that the Company receives from relocation receivables and related assets must be utilized to repay securitization obligations. These obligations were collateralized by $366 million and $393 million of underlying relocation receivables and other related relocation assets at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Substantially all relocation related assets are realized in less than twelve months from the transaction date. Accordingly, all of the Company’s securitization obligations are classified as current in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Interest incurred in connection with borrowings under these facilities amounted to $6 million and $7 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. This interest is recorded within net revenues in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Operations as related borrowings are utilized to fund the Company’s relocation business where interest is generally earned on such assets. These securitization obligations represent floating rate debt for which the average weighted interest rate was 2.1% and 2.4% for the year ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN
At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the accumulated benefit obligation of this plan was $154 million and $135 million, respectively, and the fair value of the plan assets were $94 million and $91 million, respectively, resulting in an unfunded accumulated benefit obligation of $60 million and $44 million, respectively, which is recorded in Other non-current liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Participation in this plan was frozen as of July 1, 1997. The projected benefit obligation of this plan is equal to the accumulated benefit obligation as almost all of the employees participating in this plan are no longer accruing benefits.
The following tables show the changes in benefit obligation and plan assets for the defined benefit pension plan during the years ended:
|
| | | | | | | |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
Change in benefit obligation | | | |
Benefit obligation at beginning of year | $ | 135 |
| | $ | 125 |
|
Interest cost | 7 |
| | 7 |
|
Actuarial (gain) loss | 20 |
| | 11 |
|
Net benefits paid | (8 | ) | | (8 | ) |
Benefit obligation at end of year | 154 |
| | 135 |
|
Change in plan assets | | | |
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year | $ | 91 |
| | $ | 86 |
|
Actual return on plan assets | 3 |
| | 10 |
|
Employer contribution | 8 |
| | 3 |
|
Net benefits paid | (8 | ) | | (8 | ) |
Fair value of plan assets at end of year | 94 |
| | 91 |
|
Underfunded at end of year | $ | 60 |
| | $ | 44 |
|
The weighted average assumptions that were used to determine the Company’s benefit obligation and net periodic benefit cost for the following years ended December 31 are:
|
| | | | | |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
Discount rate for year-end obligation | 4.10 | % | | 5.20 | % |
Discount rate for net periodic pension cost | 5.20 | % | | 5.70 | % |
Expected long term return on assets for year-end obligation | 7.50 | % | | 7.50 | % |
Expected long-term return on assets for net periodic pension cost | 7.25 | % | | 7.50 | % |
Compensation increase | — |
| | — |
|
The net periodic pension cost for 2011 was approximately $3 million and is comprised of interest cost of approximately $7 million and the amortization of the actuarial net loss of $3 million offset by a benefit of $7 million for the expected return on assets. The net periodic pension cost for 2010 was approximately $3 million and is comprised of interest cost of approximately $7 million and the amortization of the actuarial net loss of $2 million offset by a benefit of $6 million for the expected return on assets. The estimated actuarial loss of approximately $3 million will be amortized from the accumulated other comprehensive income into net periodic pension cost in 2012.
Estimated future benefit payments as of December 31, 2011 are as follows:
|
| | | |
Year | Amount |
2012 | $ | 8 |
|
2013 | 8 |
|
2014 | 8 |
|
2015 | 9 |
|
2016 | 9 |
|
2017 through 2021 | 48 |
|
The minimum funding required during 2012 is estimated to be $9 million.
The Company recognized a loss of $21 million and a loss of $6 million in other comprehensive income for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The total amount recognized in net periodic pension cost (benefit) and other comprehensive income was $24 million and $9 million for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The amount in accumulated other comprehensive income not yet recognized as components of the periodic pension cost (benefit) is comprised of an actuarial loss of $54 million and $34 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
It is the objective of the plan sponsor to maintain an adequate level of diversification to balance market risk, prudently invest to preserve capital and to provide sufficient liquidity under the plan. The assumption used for the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets is based on the long-term expected returns for the investment mix of assets currently in the portfolio. Historic real return trends for the various asset classes in the class portfolio are combined with anticipated future market conditions to estimate the real rate of return for each class. These rates are then adjusted for anticipated future inflation to determine estimated nominal rates of return for each class.
The following table presents the fair values of plan assets by category as of December 31, 2011:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Asset Category | Quoted Price in Active Market for Identical Assets (Level I) | | Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level II) | | Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level III) | | Total |
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 2 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
|
Equity Securities: | | | | | | | |
U.S. large-cap funds | — |
| | 25 |
| | — |
| | 25 |
|
U.S. small-cap funds | — |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | 5 |
|
International funds | — |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | 8 |
|
Real estate fund | — |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 3 |
|
Fixed Income Securities: | | | | | | | |
Bond funds | — |
| | 51 |
| | — |
| | 51 |
|
Total | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 92 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 94 |
|
The following table presents the fair values of plan assets by category as of December 31, 2010:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Asset Category | Quoted Price in Active Market for Identical Assets (Level I) | | Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level II) | | Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level III) | | Total |
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 2 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
|
Equity Securities: | | | | | | | |
U.S. large-cap funds | — |
| | 22 |
| | — |
| | 22 |
|
U.S. small-cap funds | — |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | 5 |
|
International funds | — |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | 7 |
|
Real estate fund | — |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 3 |
|
Fixed Income Securities: | | | | | | | |
Bond funds | — |
| | 52 |
| | — |
| | 52 |
|
Total | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 89 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 91 |
|
OTHER EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS
The Company also maintains post-retirement health and welfare plans for certain subsidiaries and a non-qualified pension plan for certain individuals. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the related projected benefit obligation for these plans accrued on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets (primarily within Other non-current liabilities) was $10 million and $10 million, respectively. The expense recorded by the Company in 2011 and 2010 was less than $1 million.
DEFINED CONTRIBUTION SAVINGS PLAN
The Company sponsors a defined contribution savings plan that provides certain eligible employees of the Company an opportunity to accumulate funds for retirement. Prior to mid-February 2008, the Company matched a portion of the contributions made by participating employees. In July 2010, the Company reinstated the match for a portion of the contributions made by participating employees. The Company’s cost for contributions to this plan was $5 million, $2 million and $0 for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
The income tax provision consists of the following:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Current: | | | | | |
Federal | $ | 1 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (1 | ) |
State | 5 |
| | (3 | ) | | 1 |
|
Foreign | 8 |
| | 5 |
| | 8 |
|
| 14 |
| | 2 |
| | 8 |
|
Deferred: | | | | | |
Federal | 28 |
| | 112 |
| | (45 | ) |
State | (10 | ) | | 19 |
| | (13 | ) |
| 18 |
| | 131 |
| | (58 | ) |
Income tax expense (benefit) | $ | 32 |
| | $ | 133 |
| | $ | (50 | ) |
Pre-tax income (loss) for domestic and foreign operations consisted of the following:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Domestic | $ | (422 | ) | | $ | 30 |
| | $ | (334 | ) |
Foreign | 13 |
| | 6 |
| | 24 |
|
Pre-tax income (loss) | $ | (409 | ) | | $ | 36 |
| | $ | (310 | ) |
Current and non-current deferred income tax assets and liabilities, as of December 31, are comprised of the following:
|
| | | | | | | |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
Current deferred income tax assets: | | | |
Accrued liabilities and deferred income | $ | 84 |
| | $ | 78 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts | 23 |
| | 27 |
|
Liability for unrecognized tax benefits | 3 |
| | — |
|
Cash flow hedges | 3 |
| | — |
|
| 113 |
| | 105 |
|
Less: valuation allowance | (30 | ) | | (11 | ) |
Current deferred income tax assets | 83 |
| | 94 |
|
Current deferred income tax liabilities: | | | |
Prepaid expenses | 17 |
| | 18 |
|
Current deferred income tax liabilities | 17 |
| | 18 |
|
Current net deferred income tax asset | $ | 66 |
| | $ | 76 |
|
|
| | | | | | | |
Non-current deferred income tax assets: | | | |
Net operating loss carryforwards | $ | 846 |
| | $ | 663 |
|
Alternative minimum tax credit carryforward | 2 |
| | 2 |
|
Foreign tax credit carryforwards | 3 |
| | 3 |
|
State tax credit carryforwards | 1 |
| | 1 |
|
Accrued liabilities and deferred income | 26 |
| | 32 |
|
Capital loss carryforward | 32 |
| | 32 |
|
Investment in joint venture | 3 |
| | 3 |
|
Minimum pension obligation | 22 |
| | 14 |
|
Cash flow hedges | 4 |
| | 7 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts | 6 |
| | 7 |
|
Liability for unrecognized tax benefits | 11 |
| | 9 |
|
Other | 5 |
| | 4 |
|
| 961 |
| | 777 |
|
Less: valuation allowance | (308 | ) | | (107 | ) |
Non-current deferred income tax assets | 653 |
| | 670 |
|
Less: | | | |
Non-current deferred income tax liabilities: | | | |
Depreciation and amortization | 1,074 |
| | 1,084 |
|
Non-current net deferred income tax liability | $ | (421 | ) | | $ | (414 | ) |
As of December 31, 2011, the Company had gross federal and state net operating loss carryforwards of $2,068 million. The federal net operating loss carryforwards expire between 2025 and 2031 and the state net operating loss carryforwards expire between 2012 and 2031.
Management has determined that, based upon all available evidence, it is more likely than not that certain deferred tax assets will not be utilized in the foreseeable future and, as such, has recorded a corresponding valuation allowance. In assessing the valuation allowance at December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Company determined that a full valuation allowance was required on the net definite-lived deferred tax asset balance. The Company’s valuation allowance was $338 million and $118 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The Company’s effective income tax rate differs from the U.S. federal statutory rate as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Federal statutory rate | 35 | % | | 35 | % | | 35 | % |
State and local income taxes, net of federal tax benefits | 1 |
| | (6 | ) | | 6 |
|
Net impact of IRS settlement | — |
| | 303 |
| | — |
|
Foreign rate differential | (2 | ) | | 14 |
| | — |
|
Permanent differences | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Net change in valuation allowance | (43 | ) | | 23 |
| | (23 | ) |
Other | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) |
| (8 | %) | | 369 | % | | 16 | % |
The 2011 change in valuation allowance reflects a full valuation allowance on tax benefits generated from current period operations and the impact of tax benefits from intangibles that are indefinite lived for financial statement purposes..
The majority of the rate differential for the year ended December 31, 2010 reflects the impact of our former parent company's IRS examination settlement. The settlement resulted in nontaxable book income related to the reversal of a portion of our legacy reserves as well as a reduction of certain deferred tax assets. The net tax impact of the IRS settlement reflects the federal and state tax impact of the reduction of deferred tax assets, net of valuation allowance ($109 million). The 2010 change in valuation allowance reflects the balance of the federal and state tax impact of current operations (loss for tax purposes) offset by a tax provision for the increase in deferred tax liabilities associated with indefinite-lived intangible assets.
The 2009 change in valuation allowance reflects a reduction to the previously recorded valuation allowance, partially offset by a full valuation allowance on tax benefits generated from current period operations and the impact of indefinite-lived intangible assets.
The Company is subject to income taxes in the United States and several foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining the worldwide provision for income taxes and recording related assets and liabilities. In the ordinary course of business, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. The Company is regularly under audit by tax authorities whereby the outcome of the audits is uncertain. The Company believes there is appropriate support for positions taken on its tax returns. The liabilities that have been recorded represent the best estimates of the probable loss on certain positions and are adequate for all open years based on an assessment of many factors including past experience and interpretations of tax law applied to the facts of each matter. However, the outcome of tax audits are inherently uncertain.
Tax Sharing Agreement
Under the Tax Sharing Agreement with Cendant, Wyndham Worldwide and Travelport, the Company is generally responsible for 62.5% of payments made to settle claims with respect to tax periods ending on or prior to December 31, 2006 that relate to income taxes imposed on Cendant and certain of its subsidiaries, the operations (or former operations) of which were determined by Cendant not to relate specifically to the respective businesses of Realogy, Wyndham Worldwide, Avis Budget or Travelport. On July 15, 2010, Cendant and the IRS agreed to settle the previously disclosed IRS examination of Cendant’s taxable years 2003 through 2006. Pursuant to the IRS settlement, Tax Sharing Agreement and a letter agreement executed with Wyndham, Realogy in 2010 paid $58 million, including interest, to reimburse Cendant for a portion of the amount payable by Cendant to the IRS and Wyndham for certain tax credits used under the IRS settlement. With respect to any remaining residual legacy Cendant tax liabilities which remain after the IRS settlement, the Company and its former parent believe there is appropriate support for the positions taken on Cendant’s tax returns. However, tax audits and any related litigation, including disputes or litigation on the allocation of tax liabilities between parties under the Tax Sharing Agreement, could result in outcomes for the Company that are different from those reflected in the Company’s historical financial statements.
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
The Company utilizes the FASB guidance for accounting for uncertainty in income taxes, which prescribes a recognition threshold and a measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of tax positions
taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The Company reflects changes in its liability for unrecognized tax benefits as income tax expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s gross liability for unrecognized tax benefits was $42 million, of which $31 million would affect the Company’s effective tax rate, if recognized. The Company does not expect that its unrecognized tax benefits will significantly change over the next 12 months.
The Company recognizes accrued interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in interest expense and operating expenses, respectively. The Company recognized interest expense of $5 million and penalties of $1 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, a reduction of interest expense of $1 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 and interest expense of $2 million for the year ended December 31, 2009.
The rollforward of unrecognized tax benefits are summarized in the table below:
|
| | | |
Unrecognized tax benefits—January 1, 2009 | $ | 25 |
|
Gross decreases—tax positions in prior periods | 2 |
|
Gross increases—current period tax positions | 3 |
|
Unrecognized tax benefits—December 31, 2009 | $ | 30 |
|
Gross increases—tax positions in prior periods | 7 |
|
Reduction due to lapse of statute of limitations | (3 | ) |
Unrecognized tax benefits—December 31, 2010 | $ | 34 |
|
Gross increases—tax positions in prior periods | 8 |
|
Gross increases—tax positions in current period | 5 |
|
Reduction due to lapse of statute of limitations | (5 | ) |
Unrecognized tax benefits—December 31, 2011 | $ | 42 |
|
2011 Restructuring Program
During 2011, the Company committed to various initiatives targeted principally at reducing costs, enhancing organizational efficiencies and consolidating existing facilities. The Company incurred restructuring charges of $11 million in 2011. The Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment recognized $5 million of facility related expenses and $4 million of personnel related expenses. The Relocation Services and Title and Settlement Services segments each recognized $1 million of facility and personnel related expenses. At December 31, 2011 the remaining liability is $3 million.
2010 Restructuring Program
During 2010, the Company committed to various initiatives targeted principally at reducing costs, enhancing organizational efficiencies and consolidating facilities. The Company recognized $21 million for the year ended December 31, 2010. The Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment recognized $9 million of facility related expenses, $3 million of personnel related expenses and $1 million of expense related to asset impairments. The Relocation Services segment recognized $2 million of facility related expenses and $1 million of personnel related expenses. The Title and Settlement Services segment recognized $2 million of facility related expenses and $1 million of personnel related expenses. The Corporate and Other segment recognized $2 million of facility related expenses. At December 31, 2011, the remaining liability is $3 million.
2009 Restructuring Program
During 2009, the Company committed to various initiatives targeted principally at reducing costs, enhancing organizational efficiencies and consolidating facilities. The Company recognized $74 million of restructuring expense in 2009 and the remaining liability at December 31, 2010 was $21 million. During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company utilized $9 million of the accrual resulting in a remaining liability of $12 million related to future lease payments.
Prior Restructuring Programs
The Company committed to restructuring activities targeted principally at reducing personnel related costs and consolidating facilities during 2006 through 2008. At December 31, 2010, the remaining liability was $6 million. During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company utilized $4 million of the remaining accrual resulting in a remaining liability of $2 million related to future lease payments.
| |
12. | STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION |
Incentive Equity Awards Granted by Holdings
In April 2007, Holdings adopted the Realogy Holdings Corp. 2007 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) under which non-qualified stock options, rights to purchase shares of common stock, restricted stock and other awards settleable in, or based upon, Holdings common stock may be issued to employees, consultants or directors of Realogy. The stock options and restricted stock granted are either time vesting or performance based awards with an exercise price equal to the grant date fair price of the underlying shares and a contractual term of 10 years. The time vesting options are subject to ratable vesting over the requisite service period. The performance based options are “cliff” vested upon the achievement of certain internal rate of return (“IRR”) targets which are measured based upon distributions made to the stockholders of Holdings. The restricted stock was granted at the grant date fair value and has a three-year requisite service period with one-half “cliff” vesting after 18 months of service and one-half “cliff” vesting at the end of the three-year service period.
During 2011, the Holdings Board granted 0.03 million of time vesting stock options and 4 thousand shares of time vesting restricted stock to senior management employees and an independent director of Realogy, as well as 0.08 million of performance based stock options granted under the Phantom Value Plan (see discussion below).
The fair value of the time vesting options and Phantom Plan options was estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model utilizing the following assumptions. Expected volatility was based on historical volatilities of comparable companies. The expected term of the options granted represents the period of time that options were expected to be outstanding. The risk-free interest rate was based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of the grant, which corresponds to the expected term of the options.
In 2010, Holdings exchanged certain stock options granted to employees for new stock options as described below. Each original option held by eligible employees was exchanged on a one-for-one basis for a new option with different terms. The original options had an exercise price of $250.00 per share and were 50% time vested and 50% performance based awards. They were exchanged for all time vested new awards. The new options were unvested on the date of grant and vest at a rate of 25% a year over a four-year period, which began on July 1, 2010 with a 10-year contractual term beginning on the date of grant. The exercise price of 30% of the new options issued to the Senior Executives is $137.50 per share and the exercise price of all other new options issued is $20.75 per share, which represented the fair market value of Common Stock of Holdings as determined by its Compensation Committee as of the date of grant of the new options. In November 2010, 0.41 million original options were tendered and exchanged for an equal number of new options and 0.20 million original options held by non-employees that were not eligible to participate in the exchange offer. The exchange resulted in an incremental stock compensation expense of $4 million that is recognized over a four-year vesting period, which began on July 1, 2010. The Company will continue to expense the remaining unrecognized stock compensation expense of $8 million related to the original options over their remaining vesting period. No stock options were granted during 2009. As of December 31, 2011, there were 0.89 million shares of Class A Common Stock reserved for issuance under the Amended and Restated Holdings 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, including approximately 0.72 million shares reserved for issuance upon exercise of outstanding options and approximately 0.17 million shares available for future grant. See Note 20, "Subsequent Events" for additional shares reserved under the Plan.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
| Time Vesting Options | | Phantom Plan Options | | Time Vesting Options |
Weighted average grant date fair value | $ | 11.75 |
| | $ | 10.75 |
| | $ | 9.25 |
|
Expected volatility | 55.5 | % | | 58.4 | % | | 54.6 | % |
Expected term (years) | 6.25 |
| | 4.75 |
| | 6.25 |
|
Risk-free interest rate | 2.6 | % | | 1.3 | % | | 1.5 | % |
Dividend yield | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Equity Award Activity
A summary of option and restricted share activity is presented below (number of shares in millions):
|
| | | | | | | | |
| Time-vesting Options | | Performance Based Options | | Restricted Stock |
Outstanding at January 1, 2009 | 0.32 |
| | 0.32 |
| | * |
|
Granted | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Exercised | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Vested | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Forfeited | (0.01 | ) | | (0.01 | ) | | — |
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2009 | 0.31 |
| | 0.31 |
| | * |
|
Granted/(tendered for exchange) | 0.20 |
| | (0.20 | ) | | — |
|
Exercised | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Vested | — |
| | — |
| | * |
|
Forfeited | (0.01 | ) | | (0.01 | ) | | — |
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2010 | 0.50 |
| | 0.10 |
| | * |
|
Granted | 0.03 |
| | 0.08 |
| | * |
|
Exercised | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Vested | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Forfeited | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2011 | 0.53 |
| | 0.18 |
| | * |
|
* The outstanding restricted stock of 9 thousand shares at January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2009 vested during 2010. In 2011, 4 thousand of restricted stock was granted and remained outstanding at December 31, 2011.
|
| | | | | | | |
| Options Vested | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | | Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term | | Aggregate Intrinsic Value |
Exercisable at December 31, 2011 | 0.18 | | 124.25 | | 7.5 years | | — |
As of December 31, 2011, there was approximately $5 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to the time vesting options and restricted stock under the Plan and $6 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to the performance based options. Unrecognized cost for the time vesting options and restricted stock will be recorded in future periods as compensation expense as the awards vest over the next three years with a weighted average period of approximately 1.7 years. The unrecognized cost for the performance based options will be recorded as compensation expense when an IPO or significant capital transaction is probable of occurring. The Company recorded stock-based compensation expense related to the incentive equity awards granted by Holdings of $7 million, $6 million and $7 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Phantom Value Plan
On January 5, 2011, the Board of Directors of Holdings approved the Realogy Corporation Phantom Value Plan (the “Phantom Value Plan”), which is intended to provide certain of Realogy’s executive officers, with an incentive (the “Incentive Awards”) to remain in the service of Realogy, increase interest in the success of Realogy and create the opportunity to receive compensation based upon Realogy’s success. On January 5, 2011, the Board of Directors of the Company made initial grants of Incentive Awards in three series in an aggregate amount of $22 million to certain executive officers of Realogy. Incentive Awards are immediately cancelable and forfeitable in the event of the termination of a participant’s employment for any reason. The Incentive Awards also terminate 10 years following the date of grant.
Cash and Stock Awards under the Phantom Value Plan
Under the Phantom Value Plan, each participant is eligible to receive a payment with respect to an Incentive Award relating to the Convertible Notes that RCIV Holdings (“RCIV”) purchased ($1.3 billion aggregate principal amount) for which RCIV receives cash upon the discharge or third-party sale of not less than $267 million of the aggregate principal amount of the Convertible Notes (the “Plan Notes”) (or on any non-cash consideration into which any series of Plan Notes may have been exchanged or converted). The payment with respect to an Incentive Award would be an amount which bears the same ratio to the dollar amount of the Incentive Award relating to the aggregate amount of cash received by RCIV bears to the aggregate principal amount of Plan Notes held by RCIV on the date of grant of such Incentive Award. In addition, participants may be eligible to receive additional amounts based upon cash received by RCIV pursuant to the terms of any non-cash consideration into which any Plan Notes may have been exchanged or converted. Any cash payments made under the Phantom Value Plan will be recorded as compensation expense when RCIV receives cash upon the discharge or third-party sale of the Convertible Notes.
In the event that a payment is to be made with respect to an Incentive Award in conjunction with or subsequent to a qualified public offering of common stock of Realogy or its direct or indirect parent company, a participant may elect to receive stock in lieu of the cash payment in a number of unrestricted shares of common stock with a fair market value, as determined in good faith by the Compensation Committee, equal to the dollar amount then due on such Incentive Award, plus a number of restricted shares of such common stock with a fair market value, as determined in good faith by the Compensation Committee, equal to the amount then due multiplied by 0.15. The restricted shares of common stock will vest, based on continued employment, on the first anniversary of issuance. Compensation expense for the restricted shares of common stock will be recorded over a one-year vesting period upon issuance, while compensation expense for the unrestricted shares of common stock will be recorded on the issuance date. In addition, Incentive Awards will be subject to acceleration and payment upon a change of control as specified in the Phantom Value Plan.
Stock Option Awards under the Phantom Value Plan
On each date RCIV receive cash interest on the Plan Notes, certain executive officers of Realogy may be granted stock options under the Holdings 2007 Stock Incentive Plan. The aggregate value of stock options granted (determined by the Holdings Board or its Compensation Committee in its sole discretion) is equal to an amount which bears the same ratio to the aggregate dollar amount of the participant’s Incentive Award as the aggregate amount of cash interest received by RCIV on such date bears to the aggregate principal amount of the Plan Notes held by RCIV on the date of grant of the Incentive Award. The stock option grants to Realogy’s CEO were limited to 50% of the foregoing stock option amount until November 2011 when the grants were increased to 100%. Generally, each grant of stock options will have a three year
vesting schedule, subject to the participant’s continued employment, and vested stock options will become exercisable one year following a qualified public offering. As such, compensation expense will be recorded after a public offering becomes probable of occurring. The stock options have a term of 7.5 years. In April and October 2011, Holdings issued approximately 0.03 million and 0.05 million, respectively, of stock options under the Phantom Value Plan in conjunction with RCIV receiving cash interest on the Plan Notes.
13. SEPARATION ADJUSTMENTS, TRANSACTIONS WITH FORMER PARENT AND SUBSIDIARIES AND RELATED PARTIES
Transfer of Cendant Corporate Liabilities and Issuance of Guarantees to Cendant and Affiliates
The Company has certain guarantee commitments with Cendant (pursuant to the assumption of certain liabilities and the obligation to indemnify Cendant, Wyndham Worldwide and Travelport for such liabilities) and guarantee commitments related to deferred compensation arrangements with Cendant and Wyndham Worldwide. These guarantee arrangements primarily relate to certain contingent litigation liabilities, contingent tax liabilities, and other corporate liabilities, of which the Company assumed and is generally responsible for 62.5%. Upon separation from Cendant, the liabilities assumed by the Company were comprised of certain Cendant corporate liabilities which were recorded on the historical books of Cendant as well as additional liabilities which were established for guarantees issued at the date of Separation related to certain unresolved contingent matters and certain others that could arise during the guarantee period. Regarding the guarantees, if any of the companies responsible for all or a portion of such liabilities were to default in its payment of costs or expenses related to any such liability, the Company would be responsible for a portion of the defaulting party or parties’ obligation. To the extent such recorded liabilities are in excess or are not adequate to cover the ultimate payment amounts, such deficiency or excess will be reflected in the results of operations in future periods.
The due to former parent balance was $80 million and $104 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. At December 31, 2011, the due to former parent balance was comprised of the Company’s portion of the following: (i) Cendant’s remaining state and foreign contingent tax liabilities, (ii) accrued interest on contingent tax liabilities, (iii) potential liabilities related to Cendant’s terminated or divested businesses, and (iv) potential liabilities related to the residual portion of accruals for Cendant operations.
Transactions with PHH Corporation
In January 2005, Cendant completed the spin-off of its former mortgage, fleet leasing and appraisal businesses in a tax free distribution of 100% of the common stock of PHH to its stockholders. In connection with the spin-off, the Company entered into a venture, PHH Home Loans, with PHH for the purpose of originating and selling mortgage loans primarily sourced through the Company’s real estate brokerage and relocation businesses. The Company owns 49.9% of the venture. In connection with the venture, the Company entered into an agreement with PHH and PHH Home Loans regarding the operation of the venture and a marketing agreement with PHH whereby PHH is the recommended provider of mortgage products and services promoted by the Company to its independently owned and operated franchisees. The Company also entered into a license agreement with PHH whereby PHH Home Loans was granted a license to use certain of the Company’s real estate brand names. The Company also maintains a relocation agreement with PHH whereby PHH outsources its employee relocation function to the Company and the Company subleases office space to PHH Home Loans.
In connection with these agreements, the Company recorded net revenues of $6 million, $6 million and $6 million, for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. In addition, the Company recorded equity earnings of $24 million, $28 million and $23 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The Company received cash dividends from PHH Home Loans of $20 million, $25 million and $8 million during the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
The following presents the summarized financial information for PHH Home Loans:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| December 31, | | |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | |
Balance sheet data: | | | | | |
Total assets | $ | 569 |
| | $ | 449 |
| | |
Total liabilities | 478 |
| | 367 |
| | |
Total members’ equity | 91 |
| | 82 |
| | |
| Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Statement of operations data: | | | | | |
Total revenues | $ | 248 |
| | $ | 279 |
| | $ | 252 |
|
Total expenses | 199 |
| | 222 |
| | 206 |
|
Net income | 49 |
| | 57 |
| | 46 |
|
Transactions with Related Parties
On June 26, 2009, the Company entered into a Tax Receivable Prepayment Agreement (the “Prepayment Agreement”) with WEX, pursuant to which WEX simultaneously paid the Company the sum of $51 million, less expenses of approximately $2 million, as prepayment in full of its remaining contingent obligations to the Company under the TRA.
The Company has entered into certain transactions in the normal course of business with entities that are owned by affiliates of Apollo. For the year ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, the Company has recognized revenue related to these transactions of approximately $2 million, $1 million and $1 million in the aggregate, respectively.
| |
14. | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
Litigation
The Company is involved in claims, legal proceedings and governmental inquiries related to alleged contract disputes, business practices, intellectual property and other commercial, employment, regulatory and tax matters. Examples of such matters include but are not limited to allegations:
| |
• | concerning adverse impacts to franchisees related to purported changes made to the Century 21® system and its marketing fund after the Company acquired it in 1995, which is referred to elsewhere in this report as the “Cooper Litigation”; |
| |
• | that the Company is vicariously liable for the acts of franchisees under theories of actual or apparent agency; |
| |
• | by former franchisees that franchise agreements were improperly terminated; |
| |
• | that residential real estate agents engaged by NRT – in certain states – are potentially common law employees instead of independent contractors, and therefore may bring claims against NRT for breach of contract, wrongful discharge and negligent supervision and obtain benefits available to employees under various state statutes; |
| |
• | concerning claims for alleged RESPA or state law violations including but not limited to claims relating to administrative fees or commissions that include both a fixed fee and percentage payment as well as the validity of sales associates indemnification and administrative fees; |
| |
• | concerning claims generally against the company-owned brokerage operations for negligence or breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the performance of real estate brokerage or other professional services; and |
| |
• | concerning claims generally against the title company contending that, as the escrow company, the company knew or should have known that a transaction was fraudulent. |
Real Estate Business Litigation
Frank K. Cooper Real Estate #1, Inc. v. Cendant Corp. and Century 21 Real Estate Corporation (N.J. Super. Ct. L. Div., Morris County, New Jersey). In 2002, Frank K. Cooper Real Estate #1, Inc. filed a putative class action against Cendant and Cendant’s subsidiary, Century 21 Real Estate Corporation (“Century 21”). The complaint alleges breach of certain provisions of the Real Estate Franchise Agreement entered into between Century 21 and the plaintiffs, breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and breach of certain express and implied fiduciary duties. The complaint alleges, among other things, that Cendant diverted money and resources from Century 21 franchisees and allotted them to NRT owned brokerages and otherwise improperly charged expenses to marketing funds. The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, injunctive relief, interest, attorney’s fees and costs. The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, if applicable, provides for treble damages, attorney’s fees and costs as remedies for violation of the Act. On August 17, 2010, the court granted plaintiffs’ renewed motion to certify a class. The certified class includes Century 21 franchisees at any time between August 1, 1995 and April 17, 2002 whose franchise agreements contain New Jersey choice of law and venue provisions and who have not executed releases releasing the claim (unless the release was a provision of a franchise renewal agreement). A case management order entered on November 29, 2010 established, among other things, a trial date of April 16, 2012. All expert reports have been produced and expert depositions have commenced.
As of January 24, 2012, Realogy entered into a memorandum of understanding memorializing the principal terms of a proposed settlement of this action. The structure of the proposed settlement involves both monetary and non-monetary consideration as well as contributions from insurance carriers. The non-monetary consideration includes but is not limited to waivers and modifications of certain fees and payments of incentive fees. On February 16, 2012, the parties executed a Stipulation of Settlement finalizing the terms of the settlement reflected in the memorandum of understanding. The Stipulation of Settlement and related settlement documents were submitted to the Court on February 17th by the plaintiffs to obtain preliminary approval. The court granted preliminary approval on February 22nd. Notice of the settlement will go to the class in the next 30 days. A fairness hearing will be held on June 4, 2012 when the court will determine whether to grant final approval of the settlement. Realogy has reserved for funding that would be required beyond carrier contributions and that amount is reflected in our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2011.
This class action involves substantial, complex litigation. Class action litigation is inherently unpredictable and subject to significant uncertainties. If the proposed settlement is not finalized and approved by the court, the resolution of this litigation could result in substantial losses and there can be no assurance that such resolution will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.
Larsen, et al. v. Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation, et al. (case formerly known as Joint Equity Committee of Investors of Real Estate Partners, Inc. v. Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corp., et al.). The case, pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, arises from the relationship of several of our subsidiaries with a former Coldwell Banker Commercial franchise, whose affiliated entity allegedly utilized the Coldwell Banker Commercial name in the offer and sale of securities during the period in which it was a franchisee and for a period of time after the franchise agreement was terminated. In a SEC civil proceeding asserting violations of various securities laws, by stipulated judgment dated September 2, 2009, a shareholder of the franchisee, Real Estate Partners, Inc. ("REP"), and REP's affiliated entities were ordered to disgorge approximately $53 million in funds raised from investors. REP filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2007. The complaint, initially filed in April 2010 and subsequently amended twice, most recently in March 2011, alleges, among other things, that our subsidiaries Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation and Coldwell Banker Real
Estate LLC, engaged in negligence and fraud as they knew or should have known that REP and the Coldwell Banker Commercial franchisee were using the marks in connection with the promotion of securities but that the Coldwell Banker subsidiaries failed to act to stop that use. The second amended complaint is a putative class action brought on behalf of REP investors. On September 8, 2011, the court denied the Coldwell Banker subsidiaries' motion to dismiss on the second amended complaint. On August 22, 2011, plaintiffs filed their motion to certify a class. Oral argument on the motion to certify the class is scheduled for March 5, 2012 and a decision is expected shortly after oral argument. Trial is currently scheduled for August 2012.
Realogy Corporation v. Triomphe Partners and Triomphe Immobilien (AAA/District New York). On August 15, 2011, the United States District Court of the Southern District of New York denied Triomphe’s appeal of an August 4, 2010 arbitration decision in this matter. As previously disclosed, the arbitrators found that Realogy properly terminated the franchise contracts of a former master franchisor of the Coldwell Banker brand for 28 countries, in Eastern and Western Europe, for failing to meet minimum office requirements but denied Realogy’s monetary claim. All of the former master franchisee’s counterclaims were denied.
Cendant Corporate Litigation
Pursuant to the Separation and Distribution Agreement dated as of July 27, 2006 among Cendant, Realogy, Wyndham Worldwide and Travelport, each of Realogy, Wyndham Worldwide and Travelport have assumed certain contingent and other corporate liabilities (and related costs and expenses), which are primarily related to each of their respective businesses. In addition, Realogy has assumed 62.5% and Wyndham Worldwide has assumed 37.5% of certain contingent and other corporate liabilities (and related costs and expenses) of Cendant or its subsidiaries, which are not primarily related to any of the respective businesses of Realogy, Wyndham Worldwide, Travelport and/or Cendant’s vehicle rental operations, in each case incurred or allegedly incurred on or prior to the date of the separation of Travelport from Cendant.
***
The Company believes that it has adequately accrued for legal matters as appropriate. The Company records litigation accruals for legal matters which are both probable and estimable. For legal proceedings for which there is a reasonable possibility of loss (meaning those losses for which the likelihood is more than remote but less than probable), the Company has determined that it does not have material exposure, or it is unable to develop a range of reasonably possible losses.
Litigation and other disputes are inherently unpredictable and subject to substantial uncertainties and unfavorable resolutions could occur. In addition, class action lawsuits can be costly to defend and, depending on the class size and claims, could be costly to settle. Lastly, there may be greater risk of unfavorable resolutions in the current economic environment due to various factors including the absence of other defendants (due to business failures) that may be the real cause of the liability and greater negative sentiment toward corporate defendants. As such, the Company could incur judgments or enter into settlements of claims with liability that are materially in excess of amounts accrued and these settlements could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows in any particular period.
Tax Matters
The Company is subject to income taxes in the United States and several foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining the worldwide provision for income taxes and recording related assets and liabilities. In the ordinary course of business, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. The Company is regularly under audit by tax authorities whereby the outcome of the audits is uncertain. The Company believes there is appropriate support for positions taken on its tax returns. The liabilities that have been recorded represent the best estimates of the probable loss on certain positions and are adequate for all open years based on an assessment of many factors including past experience and interpretations of tax law applied to the facts of each matter. However, the outcome of tax audits are inherently uncertain.
Under the Tax Sharing Agreement with Cendant, Wyndham Worldwide and Travelport, the Company is generally responsible for 62.5% of payments made to settle claims with respect to tax periods ending on or prior to December 31, 2006 that relate to income taxes imposed on Cendant and certain of its subsidiaries, the operations (or former operations) of which were determined by Cendant not to relate specifically to the respective businesses of Realogy, Wyndham Worldwide, Avis Budget or Travelport. On July 15, 2010, Cendant and the IRS agreed to settle the previously disclosed IRS examination of Cendant’s taxable years 2003 through 2006. Pursuant to the IRS settlement, Tax Sharing Agreement and a
letter agreement executed with Wyndham, Realogy in 2010 paid $58 million, including interest, to reimburse Cendant for a portion of the amount payable by Cendant to the IRS and Wyndham for certain tax credits used under the IRS settlement.
With respect to any remaining residual legacy Cendant tax liabilities which remain after the IRS settlement, the Company and its former parent believe there is appropriate support for the positions taken on Cendant’s tax returns. However, tax audits and any related litigation, including disputes or litigation on the allocation of tax liabilities between parties under the Tax Sharing Agreement, could result in outcomes for the Company that are different from those reflected in the Company’s historical financial statements.
Contingent Liability Letter of Credit
In April 2007, the Company established a standby irrevocable letter of credit for the benefit of Avis Budget Group in accordance with the Separation and Distribution Agreement. The synthetic letter of credit was utilized to support the Company’s payment obligations with respect to its share of Cendant contingent and other corporate liabilities. The stated amount of the standby irrevocable letter of credit is subject to periodic adjustment to reflect the then current estimate of Cendant contingent and other liabilities. In 2010, the Company entered into agreements with Avis Budget Group and Wyndham to reduce the letter of credit from $446 million to $123 million primarily due to Cendant’s IRS tax settlement for the taxable years 2003 through 2006 and other liability adjustments. In 2011, Realogy further reduced the letter of credit to $70 million. The standby irrevocable letter of credit will be terminated if (i) the Company’s senior unsecured credit rating is raised to BB by Standard and Poor’s or Ba2 by Moody’s or (ii) the aggregate value of the former parent contingent liabilities falls below $30 million.
Apollo Management Fee Agreement
In connection with the Merger, Apollo entered into a management fee agreement with the Company which allows Apollo and its affiliates to provide certain management consulting services to the Company through the end of 2016 (subject to possible extension). The Company pays Apollo an annual management fee for this service up to the sum of the greater of $15 million or 2.0% of the Company’s annual Adjusted EBITDA for the immediately preceding year, plus out-of-pocket costs and expenses in connection therewith. At December 31, 2011, the Company had $30 million accrued for the payment of Apollo management fees.
In addition, in the absence of an express agreement to the contrary, at the closing of any merger, acquisition, financing and similar transaction with a related transaction or enterprise value equal to or greater than $200 million, Apollo will receive a fee equal to 1% of the aggregate transaction or enterprise value paid to or provided by such entity or its stockholders (including the aggregate value of (x) equity securities, warrants, rights and options acquired or retained, (y) indebtedness acquired, assumed or refinanced and (z) any other consideration or compensation paid in connection with such transaction). Apollo waived any fees payable to it pursuant to the management fee agreement in connection with the 2011 Refinancing Transactions and 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering. The Company has agreed to indemnify Apollo and its affiliates and their directors, officers and representatives for potential losses relating to the services to be provided under the management fee agreement.
Escrow and Trust Deposits
As a service to the Company’s customers, it administers escrow and trust deposits which represent undisbursed amounts received for settlements of real estate transactions. With the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act in July 2010, deposits at FDIC-insured institutions are permanently insured up to $250 thousand. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act temporarily provides unlimited coverage for non-interest-bearing transaction accounts from December 31, 2010 through December 31, 2012. These escrow and trust deposits totaled approximately $272 million and $190 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. These escrow and trust deposits are not assets of the Company and, therefore, are excluded from the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. However, the Company remains contingently liable for the disposition of these deposits.
Leases
The Company is committed to making rental payments under noncancelable operating leases covering various facilities and equipment. Future minimum lease payments required under noncancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2011 are as follows:
|
| | | |
Year | Amount |
2012 | $ | 136 |
|
2013 | 98 |
|
2014 | 66 |
|
2015 | 46 |
|
2016 | 24 |
|
Thereafter | 119 |
|
| $ | 489 |
|
Capital lease obligations were $12 million, net of $1 million of imputed interest, at December 31, 2011 and $12 million, net of $2 million of imputed interest, at December 31, 2010.
The Company incurred rent expense as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Gross rent expense | $ | 173 |
| | $ | 181 |
| | $ | 195 |
|
Less: Sublease rent income | — |
| | (3 | ) | | (3 | ) |
Net rent expense | $ | 173 |
| | $ | 178 |
| | $ | 192 |
|
Purchase Commitments and Minimum Licensing Fees
In the normal course of business, the Company makes various commitments to purchase goods or services from specific suppliers, including those related to capital expenditures. The purchase commitments made by the Company as of December 31, 2011 are approximately $80 million.
The Company is required to pay a minimum licensing fee to Sotheby’s which began in 2009 and continues through 2054. The annual minimum licensing fee is approximately $2 million per year. The Company is also required to pay a minimum licensing fee to Meredith Corporation for the licensing of the Better Homes and Gardens Real Estate brand. The annual minimum licensing fee began in 2009 at $0.5 million and will increase to $4 million by 2014 and generally remains the same thereafter.
Future minimum payments for these purchase commitments and minimum licensing fees as of December 31, 2011 are as follows:
|
| | | |
Year | Amount |
2012 | $ | 48 |
|
2013 | 22 |
|
2014 | 11 |
|
2015 | 10 |
|
2016 | 9 |
|
Thereafter | 253 |
|
| $ | 353 |
|
Standard Guarantees/Indemnifications
In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into numerous agreements that contain standard guarantees and indemnities whereby the Company indemnifies another party for breaches of representations and warranties. In addition, many of these parties are also indemnified against any third party claim resulting from the transaction that is contemplated in the underlying agreement. Such guarantees or indemnifications are granted under various agreements, including those governing: (i) purchases, sales or outsourcing of assets or businesses, (ii) leases of real estate, (iii) licensing of trademarks, (iv) use of derivatives, and (v) issuances of debt securities. The guarantees or indemnifications issued are for the benefit of the: (i) buyers in sale agreements and sellers in purchase agreements, (ii) landlords in lease contracts, (iii) franchisees in licensing agreements, (iv) financial institutions in derivative contracts, and (v) underwriters in debt security issuances. While some of these guarantees extend only for the duration of the underlying agreement, many survive the expiration of the
term of the agreement or extend into perpetuity (unless subject to a legal statute of limitations). There are no specific limitations on the maximum potential amount of future payments that the Company could be required to make under these guarantees, nor is the Company able to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments to be made under these guarantees as the triggering events are not subject to predictability. With respect to certain of the aforementioned guarantees, such as indemnifications of landlords against third party claims for the use of real estate property leased by the Company, the Company maintains insurance coverage that mitigates any potential payments to be made.
Other Guarantees/Indemnifications
In the normal course of business, the Company coordinates numerous events for its franchisees and thus reserves a number of venues with certain minimum guarantees, such as room rentals at hotels local to the conference center. However, such room rentals are paid by each individual franchisee. If the franchisees do not meet the minimum guarantees, the Company is obligated to fulfill the minimum guaranteed fees. Such guarantees in effect at December 31, 2011 extend into 2013 and the maximum potential amount of future payments that the Company may be required to make under such guarantees is approximately $2 million. The Company would only be required to pay this maximum amount if none of the franchisees conducted their planned events at the reserved venues. Historically, the Company has not been required to make material payments under these guarantees.
Insurance and Self-Insurance
At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Consolidated Balance Sheets include approximately $39 million and $61 million, respectively, of liabilities relating to: (i) self-insured risks for errors and omissions and other legal matters incurred in the ordinary course of business within the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment, (ii) vacant dwellings and household goods in transit within the Relocation Services segment, and (iii) premium and claim reserves for the Company’s title underwriting business. The Company may also be subject to legal claims arising from the handling of escrow transactions and closings. The Company’s subsidiary, NRT, carries errors and omissions insurance for errors made during the real estate settlement process of $15 million in the aggregate, subject to a deductible of $1 million per occurrence. In addition, the Company carries an additional errors and omissions insurance policy for Realogy Corporation and its subsidiaries for errors made for real estate related services up to $35 million in the aggregate, subject to a deductible of $2.5 million per occurrence. This policy also provides excess coverage to NRT creating an aggregate limit of $50 million, subject to the NRT deductible of $1 million per occurrence.
The Company issues title insurance policies which provide coverage for real property mortgage lenders and buyers of real property. When acting as a title agent issuing a policy on behalf of an underwriter, the Company’s insurance risk is limited to the first $5,000 of claims on any one policy. The title underwriter which the Company acquired in January 2006 typically underwrites title insurance policies of up to $1.5 million. For policies in excess of $1.5 million, the Company typically obtains a reinsurance policy from a national underwriter to reinsure the excess amount.
Fraud, defalcation and misconduct by employees are also risks inherent in the business. The Company is the custodian of cash deposited by customers with specific instructions as to its disbursement from escrow, trust and account servicing files. The Company maintains Fidelity insurance covering the loss or theft of funds of up to $30 million annually in the aggregate, subject to a deductible of $1 million per occurrence.
The Company also maintains self-insurance arrangements relating to health and welfare, workers’ compensation, auto and general liability in addition to other benefits provided to the Company’s employees. The accruals for these self-insurance arrangements totaled approximately $17 million and $17 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
15. EQUITY (DEFICIT)
On April 10, 2007, Realogy completed the Merger with Apollo. All of Realogy's issued and outstanding common stock is currently owned by Realogy's parent, Intermediate, and all of the issued and outstanding common stock of Intermediate is owned by its parent, Holdings. Realogy has 100 shares of common stock authorized and outstanding with a par value of $0.01 per share. In addition, Realogy has 100 shares of preferred stock authorized with no shares outstanding.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
The after-tax components of accumulated other comprehensive loss are as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Currency Translation Adjustments (1) | | Minimum Pension Liability Adjustment | | Unrealized Loss on Cash Flow Hedges | | Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss (2) |
Balance at January 1, 2009 | $ | (7 | ) | | $ | (16 | ) | | $ | (23 | ) | | $ | (46 | ) |
Current period change | 7 |
| | (1 | ) | | 8 |
| | 14 |
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 | — |
| | (17 | ) | | (15 | ) | | (32 | ) |
Current period change | — |
| | (3 | ) | | 5 |
| | 2 |
|
Balance at December 31, 2010 | — |
| | (20 | ) | | (10 | ) | | (30 | ) |
Current period change | — |
| | (12 | ) | | 10 |
| | (2 | ) |
Balance at December 31, 2011 | $ | — |
| | $ | (32 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | (32 | ) |
_______________
| |
(1) | Assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries having non-U.S.–dollar functional currencies are translated at exchange rates at the balance sheet dates and equity accounts are translated at historical spot rates. Revenues and expenses are translated at average exchange rates during the periods presented. The gains or losses resulting from translating foreign currency financial statements into U.S. dollars are included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Gains or losses resulting from foreign currency transactions are included in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. |
| |
(2) | As of December 31, 2011, the Company does not have any after-tax components of accumulated other comprehensive loss attributable to noncontrolling interests. |
Realogy Statements of Equity (Deficit) for the year ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009
Total equity (deficit) for Realogy equals that of Holdings, but the components, common stock and additional paid-in capital are different. The table below presents information regarding the balances and changes in common stock and additional paid-in capital of Realogy for each of the three years ended December 31, 2011.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Realogy Corporation Stockholder’s Equity - Revised | | | | |
| Common Stock | | Additional Paid-In Capital | | Accumulated Deficit | | Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss | | Non- controlling Interests | | Total Equity (Deficit) |
|
|
| Shares | | Amount | |
Balance at January 1, 2009 | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,013 |
| | $ | (2,700 | ) | | $ | (46 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (731 | ) |
Net loss | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (262 | ) | | — |
| | 2 |
| | (260 | ) |
Other comprehensive income (loss) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 14 |
| | — |
| | 14 |
|
Stock-based compensation | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
|
Dividends | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
Balance at December 31, 2009 | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,020 |
| | $ | (2,962 | ) | | $ | (32 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (972 | ) |
Net loss | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (97 | ) |
Other comprehensive income (loss) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 2 |
|
Stock-based compensation | — |
| | — |
| | 6 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6 |
|
Dividends | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
Balance at December 31, 2010 | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,026 |
| | $ | (3,061 | ) | | $ | (30 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (1,063 | ) |
Net loss | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (439 | ) |
Other comprehensive income (loss) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | (2 | ) |
Stock-based compensation | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
|
Dividends | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (2 | ) |
Balance at December 31, 2011 | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,033 |
| | $ | (3,502 | ) | | $ | (32 | ) | | $ | 2 |
| | $ | (1,499 | ) |
Earnings (loss) per share attributable to Holdings
Basic earnings per share is computed based upon weighted-average shares outstanding during the period. Dilutive earnings per share is computed consistently with the basic computation while giving effect to all dilutive potential common shares and common share equivalents that were outstanding during the period. Holdings uses the treasury stock method to reflect the potential dilutive effect of unvested stock awards and unexercised options.
The Company was in a net loss position for each of the three years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, and therefore the impact of stock options and restricted stock were excluded from the computation of dilutive earnings (loss) per share because they were anti-dilutive. The number of stock options excluded from the computation was 0.7 million, 0.6 million and 0.6 million shares for the three years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively. The number of restricted stock shares excluded from the computation were 4 thousand, none and 8 thousand shares for the three years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively.
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation
On January 5, 2011, in connection with the consummation of the Debt Exchange Offering, Holdings amended and restated its certificate of incorporation. Under its amended and restated certificate of incorporation, Holdings has the authority to issue up to 180,000,000 shares, of which Holdings has the authority to issue 168,000,000 shares of Class A Common Stock, $0.01 par value (the “Class A Common Stock”), 10,000,000 shares of Class B Common Stock, $0.01 par value and 2,000,000 shares of Preferred Stock, $0.01 par value. Pursuant to Holdings’ amended and restated certificate of incorporation, the outstanding shares of common stock of Holdings were reclassified on a share-for-share basis into shares of Class B Common Stock, the voting of which is controlled by Apollo.
The Convertible Notes are convertible to shares of Class A Common Stock upon conversion. Each share of Class A Common Stock has one vote per share, and each share of Class B Common Stock has five votes per share. The Class B Common Stock will automatically convert into Class A Common Stock on a share-for-share basis once (i) Apollo converts all of the Convertible Notes it received in the Debt Exchange Offering into shares of Class A Common Stock or (ii) upon a Qualified Public Offering, provided that such conversion would not result in a change of control of Realogy under the senior secured credit facility or any of Realogy’s other debt arrangements.
16. RISK MANAGEMENT AND FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The following is a description of the Company’s risk management policies.
Interest Rate Risk
At December 31, 2011, the Company had total long-term debt of $7,150 million, excluding $327 million of securitization obligations. Of the $7,150 million of long-term debt, the Company has $2,759 million of variable interest rate debt primarily based on LIBOR. Although we have entered into interest rate swaps, involving the exchange of floating for fixed rate interest payments, to reduce interest rate volatility for a portion of our variable rate borrowings, such interest rate swaps do not eliminate interest rate volatility for all of our variable rate indebtedness at December 31, 2011. The remaining variable interest rate debt is subject to market rate risk as our interest payments will fluctuate as a result of market changes.
At December 31, 2011, the fair value of the Company’s long-term debt, excluding securitization obligations, approximated $5,690 million, which was determined based on quoted market prices. Since considerable judgment is required in interpreting market information, the fair value of the long-term debt is not necessarily indicative of the amount that could be realized in a current market exchange.
In the normal course of business, the Company borrows funds under its securitization facilities and utilizes such funds to generate assets on which it generally earns interest income. The Company does not believe it is exposed to significant interest rate risk in connection with these activities as the rate it incurs on such borrowings and the rate it earns on such assets are generally based on similar variable indices, thereby providing a natural hedge.
Credit Risk and Exposure
The Company is exposed to counterparty credit risk in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to various agreements and sales transactions. The Company manages such risk by evaluating the financial position and creditworthiness of such counterparties and by requiring collateral in instances in which financing is provided. The Company mitigates counterparty credit risk associated with its derivative contracts by monitoring the amounts at risk with each counterparty to such contracts, periodically evaluating counterparty creditworthiness and financial position, and where possible, dispersing its risk among multiple counterparties.
As of December 31, 2011, there were no significant concentrations of credit risk with any individual counterparty or groups of counterparties. The Company actively monitors the credit risk associated with the Company’s receivables.
Market Risk Exposure
The Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment, NRT, owns real estate brokerage offices located in and around large metropolitan areas in the U.S. NRT has more offices and realizes more of its revenues in California, Florida and the New York metropolitan area than any other regions of the country. For the year ended December 31, 2011, NRT generated approximately 28% of its revenues from California, 25% from the New York metropolitan area and 11% from Florida. For the year ended December 31, 2010, NRT generated approximately 27% of its revenues from California, 26% from the New York metropolitan area and 10% from Florida. For the year ended December 31, 2009, NRT generated approximately 27% of its revenues from California, 23% from the New York metropolitan area and 11% from Florida.
Derivative Instruments
The Company uses foreign currency forward contracts largely to manage its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates associated with its foreign currency denominated receivables and payables. The Company primarily manages its foreign currency exposure to the Swiss Franc, Canadian Dollar, British Pound and Euro. The Company has elected not to utilize hedge accounting for these forward contracts; therefore, any change in fair value is recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. However, the fluctuations in the value of these forward contracts generally offset the impact of changes in the value of the underlying risk that they are intended to economically hedge. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had outstanding foreign currency forward contracts with a fair value of less than $1 million and a notional value of $15 million. As of December 31, 2010, the Company had outstanding foreign currency forward contracts with a fair value of less than $1 million and a notional value of $18 million.
The Company also enters into interest rate swaps to manage its exposure to changes in interest rates associated with its variable rate borrowings. The Company has three interest rate swaps with an aggregate notional value of $650 million to hedge the variability in cash flows resulting from the term loan facility. One swap, with a notional value of $225 million, expires in July 2012, the second swap, with a notional value of $200 million, expires in December 2012 and the third swap, with a notional value of $225 million, commences in July 2012 and expires in October 2016. The Company is utilizing pay fixed interest swaps (in exchange for floating LIBOR rate based payments) to perform this hedging strategy.
At December 31, 2010, $425 million of the derivatives were being accounted for as cash flow hedges in accordance with the FASB’s derivative and hedging guidance and the unfavorable fair market value of the swaps was recorded within Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss) (“AOCI”). Following the completion of the 2011 Refinancing Transactions, the Company was not able to maintain hedge effectiveness in accordance with the accounting guidance. As a result, the interest rate swaps were de-designated as cash flow hedging instruments and the fair value of $17 million was reclassified from AOCI and recognized in interest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Operations during the first quarter of 2011.
The fair value of derivative instruments was as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Liability Derivatives | | December 31, 2011 Fair Value | | December 31, 2010 Fair Value |
Designated as Hedging Instruments | | Balance Sheet Location | | |
Interest rate swap contracts | | Other non-current liabilities | | $ | — |
| | $ | 17 |
|
Not Designated as Hedging Instruments | | | | | | |
Interest rate swap contracts | | Other current liabilities | | $ | 7 |
| | $ | — |
|
| | Other non-current liabilities | | 10 |
| | — |
|
| | | | $ | 17 |
| | $ | — |
|
The effect of derivative instruments on earnings is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income | | Location of Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Income (Effective Portion) | | Gain or (Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Income |
Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedge Relationships | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | Year Ended December 31, 2010 | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
Interest rate swap contracts | | $ | — |
| | $ | 8 |
| | Interest expense | | $ | (17 | ) | | $ | (19 | ) |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Instruments Not Designated as Hedging Instruments | | Location of Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income for Derivative Instruments | | Gain or (Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivative |
Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | Year Ended, December 31, 2010 |
Interest rate swap contracts | | Interest expense | | $ | (7 | ) | | $ | — |
|
Foreign exchange contracts | | Operating expense | | — |
| | $ | (1 | ) |
Financial Instruments
The following tables present the Company’s assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis and are categorized using the fair value hierarchy. The fair value hierarchy has three levels based on the reliability of the inputs used to determine fair value.
|
| | |
Level Input: | | Input Definitions: |
Level I | | Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets at the measurement date. |
| |
Level II | | Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level I that are observable for the asset or liability through corroboration with market data at the measurement date. |
| |
Level III | | Unobservable inputs that reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date. |
The availability of observable inputs can vary from asset to asset and is affected by a wide variety of factors, including, for example, the type of asset, whether the asset is new and not yet established in the marketplace, and other characteristics particular to the transaction. To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by the Company in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level III. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement in its entirety falls is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety.
The fair value of financial instruments is generally determined by reference to quoted market values. In cases where quoted market prices are not available, fair value is based on estimates using present value or other valuation techniques, as appropriate. The fair value of interest rate swaps is determined based upon a discounted cash flow approach that incorporates counterparty and performance risk and therefore is categorized in Level III.
The following table summarizes fair value measurements by level at December 31, 2011 for assets/liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Level I | | Level II | | Level III | | Total |
Derivatives | | | | | | | |
Interest rate swaps (included in other current and non-current liabilities) | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 17 |
| | $ | 17 |
|
Deferred compensation plan assets (included in other non-current assets) | $ | 1 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
|
The following table summarizes fair value measurements by level at December 31, 2010 for assets/liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Level I | | Level II | | Level III | | Total |
Derivatives | | | | | | | |
Interest rate swaps (included in other current and non-current liabilities) | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 17 |
| | $ | 17 |
|
Deferred compensation plan assets (included in other non-current assets) | $ | 1 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
|
The following table presents changes in Level III financial liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
|
| | | |
Fair value at January 1, 2010 | $ | 25 |
|
Changes reflected in other comprehensive loss | (8 | ) |
Fair value at December 31, 2010 | 17 |
|
Changes reflected in other comprehensive loss | — |
|
Fair value at December 31, 2011 | $ | 17 |
|
The following table summarizes the carrying amount of the Company’s indebtedness compared to the estimated fair value, primarily determined by quoted market values, at:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| December 31, 2011 | | December 31, 2010 |
| Carrying Amount | | Estimated Fair Value | | Carrying Amount | | Estimated Fair Value |
Debt | | | | | | | |
Senior Secured Credit Facility: | | | | | | | |
Non-extended revolving credit facility | $ | 78 |
| | $ | 78 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
|
Extended revolving credit facility | 97 |
| | 97 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Non-extended term loan facility | 629 |
| | 590 |
| | 3,059 |
| | 2,903 |
|
Extended term loan facility | 1,822 |
| | 1,630 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
First and a Half Lien Notes | 700 |
| | 606 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Second Lien Loans | 650 |
| | 655 |
| | 650 |
| | 720 |
|
Other bank indebtedness | 133 |
| | 133 |
| | 163 |
| | 163 |
|
Existing Notes: | | | | | | | |
10.50% Senior Notes | 64 |
| | 56 |
| | 1,688 |
| | 1,656 |
|
11.00%/11.75% Senior Toggle Notes | 52 |
| | 43 |
| | 468 |
| | 449 |
|
12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes | 187 |
| | 144 |
| | 864 |
| | 806 |
|
Extended Maturity Notes: | | | | | | | |
11.50% Senior Notes | 489 |
| | 367 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
12.00% Senior Notes | 129 |
| | 95 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
13.375% Senior Subordinated Notes | 10 |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
11.00% Convertible Notes | 2,110 |
| | 1,189 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Securitization obligations | 327 |
| | 327 |
| | 331 |
| | 331 |
|
The reportable segments presented below represent the Company’s operating segments for which separate financial information is available and which is utilized on a regular basis by its chief operating decision maker to assess performance and to allocate resources. In identifying its reportable segments, the Company also considers the nature of services provided by its operating segments. Management evaluates the operating results of each of its reportable segments based upon revenue and EBITDA, which is defined as net income (loss) before depreciation and amortization, interest (income) expense, net (other than Relocation Services interest for secured assets and obligations) and income taxes, each of which is presented in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Company’s presentation of EBITDA may not be comparable to similar measures used by other companies.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Revenues (a) (b) |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 557 |
| | $ | 560 |
| | $ | 538 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 2,970 |
| | 3,016 |
| | 2,959 |
|
Relocation Services | 423 |
| | 405 |
| | 320 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 359 |
| | 325 |
| | 328 |
|
Corporate and Other (c) | (216 | ) | | (216 | ) | | (213 | ) |
Total Company | $ | 4,093 |
| | $ | 4,090 |
| | $ | 3,932 |
|
_______________
| |
(a) | Transactions between segments are eliminated in consolidation. Revenues for the Real Estate Franchise Services segment include intercompany royalties and marketing fees paid by the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment of $216 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, $216 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 and $213 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. Such amounts are eliminated through the Corporate and Other line. |
| |
(b) | Revenues for the Relocation Services segment include intercompany referral and relocation fees paid by the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment of $37 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, $37 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 and $34 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. Such amounts are recorded as contra-revenues by the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment. There are no other material inter-segment transactions. |
| |
(c) | Includes the elimination of transactions between segments. |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| EBITDA (a) (b) (c) |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 320 |
| | $ | 352 |
| | $ | 323 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 56 |
| | 80 |
| | 6 |
|
Relocation Services | 115 |
| | 109 |
| | 122 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 29 |
| | 25 |
| | 20 |
|
Corporate and Other (c) | (77 | ) | | 269 |
| | (6 | ) |
Total Company | $ | 443 |
| | $ | 835 |
| | $ | 465 |
|
______________ | |
(a) | Includes $11 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs, offset by a net benefit of $15 million of former parent legacy items for the year ended December 31, 2011. Includes $21 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs, offset by a net benefit of $323 million of former parent legacy items primarily as a result of tax and other liability adjustments for the year ended December 31, 2010. Includes $70 million of restructuring costs and $1 million of merger costs offset by a benefit of $34 million of former parent legacy items (comprised of a benefit of $55 million recorded at Cartus related to WEX partially offset by $21 million of expenses recorded at Corporate) for the year ended December 31, 2009. |
| |
(b) | 2011 EBITDA includes a loss on the early extinguishment of debt of $36 million and 2009 EBITDA includes a gain on the early extinguishment of debt of $75 million. |
| |
(c) | Includes the elimination of transactions between segments. |
Provided below is a reconciliation of EBITDA to Net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
EBITDA | $ | 443 |
| | $ | 835 |
| | $ | 465 |
|
Less: | | | | | |
Depreciation and amortization | 186 |
| | 197 |
| | 194 |
|
Interest expense/(income), net | 666 |
| | 604 |
| | 583 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes | (409 | ) | | 34 |
| | (312 | ) |
Income tax expense (benefit) | 32 |
| | 133 |
| | (50 | ) |
Net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (262 | ) |
Depreciation and Amortization
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 77 |
| | $ | 78 |
| | $ | 78 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 41 |
| | 44 |
| | 56 |
|
Relocation Services | 47 |
| | 50 |
| | 34 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 12 |
| | 17 |
| | 18 |
|
Corporate and Other | 9 |
| | 8 |
| | 8 |
|
Total Company | $ | 186 |
| | $ | 197 |
| | $ | 194 |
|
Segment Assets
|
| | | | | | | |
| As of December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 4,730 |
| | $ | 4,802 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 840 |
| | 874 |
|
Relocation Services | 1,369 |
| | 1,404 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 290 |
| | 277 |
|
Corporate and Other | 121 |
| | 212 |
|
Total Company | $ | 7,350 |
| | $ | 7,569 |
|
Capital Expenditures
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| For the Year Ended December 31, |
| 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 7 |
| | $ | 6 |
| | $ | 6 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 22 |
| | 22 |
| | 17 |
|
Relocation Services | 7 |
| | 8 |
| | 7 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 8 |
| | 6 |
| | 6 |
|
Corporate and Other | 5 |
| | 7 |
| | 4 |
|
Total Company | $ | 49 |
| | $ | 49 |
| | $ | 40 |
|
The geographic segment information provided below is classified based on the geographic location of the Company’s subsidiaries.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| United States | | All Other Countries | | Total |
On or for the year ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | |
Net revenues | $ | 3,968 |
| | $ | 125 |
| | $ | 4,093 |
|
Total assets | 7,246 |
| | 104 |
| | 7,350 |
|
Net property and equipment | 164 |
| | 1 |
| | 165 |
|
On or for the year ended December 31, 2010 | | | | | |
Net revenues | $ | 3,990 |
| | $ | 100 |
| | $ | 4,090 |
|
Total assets | 7,463 |
| | 106 |
| | 7,569 |
|
Net property and equipment | 185 |
| | 1 |
| | 186 |
|
On or for the year ended December 31, 2009 | | | | | |
Net revenues | $ | 3,838 |
| | $ | 94 |
| | $ | 3,932 |
|
Total assets | 7,518 |
| | 63 |
| | 7,581 |
|
Net property and equipment | 210 |
| | 1 |
| | 211 |
|
| |
18. | SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED) |
Provided below is selected unaudited quarterly financial data for 2011 and 2010.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2011 |
| First | | Second | | Third | | Fourth |
Net revenues | | | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 118 |
| | $ | 160 |
| | $ | 151 |
| | $ | 128 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 587 |
| | 884 |
| | 841 |
| | 658 |
|
Relocation Services | 87 |
| | 110 |
| | 126 |
| | 100 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 83 |
| | 90 |
| | 95 |
| | 91 |
|
Other (a) | (44 | ) | | (65 | ) | | (58 | ) | | (49 | ) |
| $ | 831 |
| | $ | 1,179 |
| | $ | 1,155 |
| | $ | 928 |
|
Loss before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests (b) | | | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 42 |
| | $ | 78 |
| | $ | 74 |
| | $ | 50 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | (47 | ) | | 34 |
| | 24 |
| | (23 | ) |
Relocation Services | (2 | ) | | 21 |
| | 39 |
| | 11 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | (1 | ) | | 9 |
| | 6 |
| | 4 |
|
Other | (228 | ) | | (166 | ) | | (171 | ) | | (187 | ) |
| $ | (236 | ) | | $ | (24 | ) | | $ | (28 | ) | | $ | (145 | ) |
| | | | | | | |
Net loss attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (237 | ) | | $ | (22 | ) | | $ | (28 | ) | | $ | (154 | ) |
Loss per share attributable to Holdings (c):
| | | | | | | |
Basic loss per share: | $ | (29.56 | ) | | $ | (2.74 | ) | | $ | (3.49 | ) | | $ | (19.21 | ) |
Diluted loss per share: | $ | (29.56 | ) | | $ | (2.74 | ) | | $ | (3.49 | ) | | $ | (19.21 | ) |
_______________
| |
(a) | Represents the elimination of transactions primarily between the Real Estate Franchise Services segment and the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment. |
| |
(b) | The quarterly results include the following: |
| |
• | A loss on the early extinguishment of debt of $36 million in the first quarter; |
| |
• | Former parent legacy cost (benefit) of $(2) million, $(12) million, $(3) million and $2 million in the first, second, third and fourth quarters, respectively; |
| |
• | Restructuring charges of $2 million, $3 million, $3 million and $3 million in the first, second, third and fourth quarters, respectively; and |
| |
• | Merger costs of $1 million in the fourth quarter. |
| |
(c) | Basic and diluted EPS amounts in each quarter are computed using the weighted-average number of shares outstanding during that quarter, while basic and diluted EPS for the full year is computed using the weighted-average number of shares outstanding during the year. Therefore, the sum of the four quarters’ basic or diluted EPS may not equal the full year basic or diluted EPS. |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2010 |
| First | | Second | | Third | | Fourth |
Net revenues | | | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 122 |
| | $ | 173 |
| | $ | 138 |
| | $ | 127 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | 601 |
| | 956 |
| | 762 |
| | 697 |
|
Relocation Services | 76 |
| | 106 |
| | 122 |
| | 101 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | 65 |
| | 86 |
| | 84 |
| | 90 |
|
Other (a) | (45 | ) | | (68 | ) | | (54 | ) | | (49 | ) |
| $ | 819 |
| | $ | 1,253 |
| | $ | 1,052 |
| | $ | 966 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests (b) | | | | | | | |
Real Estate Franchise Services | $ | 46 |
| | $ | 103 |
| | $ | 71 |
| | $ | 55 |
|
Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services | (47 | ) | | 64 |
| | 8 |
| | (20 | ) |
Relocation Services | (8 | ) | | 15 |
| | 38 |
| | 15 |
|
Title and Settlement Services | (10 | ) | | 8 |
| | 3 |
| | 8 |
|
Other | (173 | ) | | 143 |
| | (156 | ) | | (157 | ) |
| $ | (192 | ) | | $ | 333 |
| | $ | (36 | ) | | $ | (99 | ) |
| | | | | | | |
Net income (loss) attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (197 | ) | | $ | 222 |
| | $ | (33 | ) | | $ | (91 | ) |
Earnings (loss) per share attributable to Holdings (c): | | | | | | | |
Basic earnings (loss) per share: | $ | (24.60 | ) | | $ | 27.69 |
| | $ | (4.12 | ) | | $ | (11.35 | ) |
Diluted earnings (loss) per share: | $ | (24.60 | ) | | $ | 27.69 |
| | $ | (4.12 | ) | | $ | (11.35 | ) |
_______________
| |
(a) | Represents the elimination of transactions primarily between the Real Estate Franchise Services segment and the Company Owned Real Estate Brokerage Services segment. |
| |
(b) | The quarterly results include the following: |
| |
• | Former parent legacy cost (benefit) of $5 million, $(314) million, $(6) million and $(8) million in the first, second, third and fourth quarters, respectively; |
| |
• | Restructuring charges of $6 million, $4 million, $2 million and $9 million in the first, second, third and fourth quarters, respectively; and |
| |
• | Merger costs of $1 million in the fourth quarter. |
| |
(c) | Basic and diluted EPS amounts in each quarter are computed using the weighted-average number of shares outstanding during that quarter, while basic and diluted EPS for the full year is computed using the weighted-average number of shares outstanding during the year. Therefore, the sum of the four quarters’ basic or diluted EPS may not equal the full year basic or diluted EPS. In the second quarter of 2010, the impact of unexercised options and unvested restricted stock were anti-dilutive and, accordingly, no unexercised options or unvested restricted stock were included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share based on the application of the treasury stock method. |
| |
19. | GUARANTOR/NON-GUARANTOR SUPPLEMENTAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION |
The following consolidating financial information presents the Consolidating Balance Sheets and Consolidating Statements of Operations and Cash Flows for: (i) Realogy Holdings Corp. (“Holdings”); (ii) its direct wholly owned subsidiary Domus Intermediate Holdings Corp. (“Intermediate”); (iii) its indirect wholly owned subsidiary, Realogy Corporation (“Realogy”); (iv) the guarantor subsidiaries of Realogy; (v) the non-guarantor subsidiaries of Realogy; (vi) elimination entries necessary to consolidate Holdings, Intermediate, Realogy and the guarantor and non-guarantor subsidiaries; and (vii) the Company on a consolidated basis. The guarantor subsidiaries of Realogy are comprised of 100% owned entities. Guarantor and non-guarantor subsidiaries are 100% owned by Realogy, either directly or indirectly. All guarantees are full and unconditional and joint and several. Non-guarantor entities are comprised of securitization entities, foreign subsidiaries, unconsolidated entities, insurance underwriter subsidiaries and qualified foreign holding corporations. The guarantor and non-guarantor financial information is prepared using the same basis of accounting as the consolidated financial statements except for the investments in consolidated subsidiaries which are accounted for using the equity method.
Consolidating Statement of Operations
Year Ended December 31, 2011
(in millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Holdings | | Intermediate | | Realogy | | Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Eliminations | | Consolidated |
Revenues | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gross commission income | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,926 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,926 |
|
Service revenue | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 494 |
| | 258 |
| | — |
| | 752 |
|
Franchise fees | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 256 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 256 |
|
Other | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 152 |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | 159 |
|
Net revenues | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,828 |
| | 265 |
| | — |
| | 4,093 |
|
Expenses | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commission and other agent-related costs | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,932 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,932 |
|
Operating | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | 1,072 |
| | 197 |
| | — |
| | 1,270 |
|
Marketing | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 183 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 185 |
|
General and administrative | — |
| | — |
| | 55 |
| | 181 |
| | 18 |
| | — |
| | 254 |
|
Former parent legacy costs (benefit), net | — |
| | — |
| | (15 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (15 | ) |
Restructuring costs | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 11 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 11 |
|
Merger costs | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | — |
| | — |
| | 9 |
| | 176 |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | 186 |
|
Interest expense/(income), net | — |
| | — |
| | 655 |
| | 11 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 666 |
|
Loss on the early extinguishment of debt | — |
| | — |
| | 36 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 36 |
|
Intercompany transactions | — |
| | — |
| | 5 |
| | (4 | ) | | (1 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Total expenses | — |
| | — |
| | 747 |
| | 3,562 |
| | 217 |
| | — |
| | 4,526 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests | — |
| | — |
| | (747 | ) | | 266 |
| | 48 |
| | — |
| | (433 | ) |
Income tax expense (benefit) | — |
| | — |
| | (111 | ) | | 127 |
| | 16 |
| | — |
| | 32 |
|
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated entities | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (26 | ) | | — |
| | (26 | ) |
Equity in (earnings) losses of subsidiaries | 441 |
| | 441 |
| | (195 | ) | | (56 | ) | | — |
| | (631 | ) | | — |
|
Net income (loss) | (441 | ) | | (441 | ) | | (441 | ) | | 195 |
| | 58 |
| | 631 |
| | (439 | ) |
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | (2 | ) |
Net income (loss) attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | (441 | ) | | $ | 195 |
| | $ | 56 |
| | $ | 631 |
| | $ | (441 | ) |
Consolidating Statement of Operations
Year Ended December 31, 2010
(in millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Holdings | | Intermediate | | Realogy | | Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Eliminations | | Consolidated |
Revenues | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gross commission income | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,965 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,965 |
|
Service revenue | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 496 |
| | 204 |
| | — |
| | 700 |
|
Franchise fees | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 263 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 263 |
|
Other | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 157 |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | 162 |
|
Net revenues | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,881 |
| | 209 |
| | — |
| | 4,090 |
|
Expenses | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commission and other agent-related costs | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,932 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,932 |
|
Operating | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,086 |
| | 155 |
| | — |
| | 1,241 |
|
Marketing | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 177 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 179 |
|
General and administrative | — |
| | — |
| | 51 |
| | 172 |
| | 15 |
| | — |
| | 238 |
|
Former parent legacy costs (benefit), net | — |
| | — |
| | (323 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (323 | ) |
Restructuring costs | — |
| | — |
| | 3 |
| | 18 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 21 |
|
Merger Costs | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | — |
| | — |
| | 8 |
| | 187 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 197 |
|
Interest expense/(income), net | — |
| | — |
| | 597 |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 604 |
|
Other (income)/expense, net | — |
| | — |
| | (1 | ) | | (5 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (6 | ) |
Intercompany transactions | — |
| | — |
| | 5 |
| | (4 | ) | | (1 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Total expenses | — |
| | — |
| | 341 |
| | 3,570 |
| | 173 |
| | — |
| | 4,084 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests | — |
| | — |
| | (341 | ) | | 311 |
| | 36 |
| | — |
| | 6 |
|
Income tax expense (benefit) | — |
| | — |
| | (252 | ) | | 383 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 133 |
|
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated entities | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (30 | ) | | — |
| | (30 | ) |
Equity in (earnings) losses of subsidiaries | 99 |
| | 99 |
| | 10 |
| | (62 | ) | | — |
| | (146 | ) | | — |
|
Net income (loss) | (99 | ) | | (99 | ) | | (99 | ) | | (10 | ) | | 64 |
| | 146 |
| | (97 | ) |
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | (2 | ) |
Net income (loss) attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (99 | ) | | $ | (10 | ) | | $ | 62 |
| | $ | 146 |
| | $ | (99 | ) |
Consolidating Statement of Operations
Year Ended December 31, 2009
(in millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Holdings | | Intermediate | | Realogy | | Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Eliminations | | Consolidated |
Revenues | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gross commission income | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,884 |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,886 |
|
Service revenue | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 436 |
| | 185 |
| | — |
| | 621 |
|
Franchise fees | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 273 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 273 |
|
Other | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 146 |
| | 6 |
| | — |
| | 152 |
|
Net revenues | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,739 |
| | 193 |
| | — |
| | 3,932 |
|
Expenses | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commission and other agent-related costs | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,850 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,850 |
|
Operating | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,135 |
| | 128 |
| | — |
| | 1,263 |
|
Marketing | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 159 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 161 |
|
General and administrative | — |
| | — |
| | 49 |
| | 193 |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | 250 |
|
Former parent legacy costs (benefit), net | — |
| | — |
| | 21 |
| | (55 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (34 | ) |
Restructuring costs | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
| | 63 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 70 |
|
Merger Costs | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | — |
| | — |
| | 8 |
| | 184 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 194 |
|
Interest expense/(income), net | — |
| | — |
| | 580 |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 583 |
|
Gain on the extinguishment of debt | — |
| | — |
| | (75 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (75 | ) |
Other (income)/expense, net | — |
| | — |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | 3 |
|
Intercompany transactions | — |
| | — |
| | 6 |
| | (5 | ) | | (1 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Total expenses | — |
| | — |
| | 599 |
| | 3,527 |
| | 140 |
| | — |
| | 4,266 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes, equity in earnings and noncontrolling interests | — |
| | — |
| | (599 | ) | | 212 |
| | 53 |
| | — |
| | (334 | ) |
Income tax expense (benefit) | — |
| | — |
| | (173 | ) | | 97 |
| | 26 |
| | — |
| | (50 | ) |
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated entities | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (24 | ) | | — |
| | (24 | ) |
Equity in (earnings) losses of subsidiaries | 262 |
| | 262 |
| | (164 | ) | | (49 | ) | | — |
| | (311 | ) | | — |
|
Net income (loss) | (262 | ) | | (262 | ) | | (262 | ) | | 164 |
| | 51 |
| | 311 |
| | (260 | ) |
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | (2 | ) |
Net income (loss) attributable to Holdings and Realogy | $ | (262 | ) | | $ | (262 | ) | | $ | (262 | ) | | $ | 164 |
| | $ | 49 |
| | $ | 311 |
| | $ | (262 | ) |
Consolidating Balance Sheet
December 31, 2011
(in millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Holdings | | Intermediate | | Realogy | | Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Eliminations | | Consolidated |
ASSETS | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Current assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 80 |
| | $ | 67 |
| | $ | (6 | ) | | $ | 143 |
|
Trade receivables, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 75 |
| | 45 |
| | — |
| | 120 |
|
Relocation receivables | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 14 |
| | 364 |
| | — |
| | 378 |
|
Relocation properties held for sale | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 11 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 11 |
|
Deferred income taxes | — |
| | — |
| | 14 |
| | 53 |
| | (1 | ) | | — |
| | 66 |
|
Intercompany note receivable | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6 |
| | 19 |
| | (25 | ) | | — |
|
Other current assets | — |
| | — |
| | 8 |
| | 64 |
| | 16 |
| | — |
| | 88 |
|
Total current assets | — |
| | — |
| | 24 |
| | 303 |
| | 510 |
| | (31 | ) | | 806 |
|
Property and equipment, net | — |
| | — |
| | 17 |
| | 145 |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 165 |
|
Goodwill | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,299 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,299 |
|
Trademarks | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 732 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 732 |
|
Franchise agreements, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,697 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,697 |
|
Other intangibles, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 439 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 439 |
|
Other non-current assets | — |
| | — |
| | 68 |
| | 85 |
| | 59 |
| | — |
| | 212 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries | (1,499 | ) | | (1,499 | ) | | 8,216 |
| | 181 |
| | — |
| | (5,399 | ) | | — |
|
Total assets | $ | (1,499 | ) | | $ | (1,499 | ) | | $ | 8,325 |
| | $ | 6,881 |
| | $ | 572 |
| | $ | (5,430 | ) | | $ | 7,350 |
|
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY (DEFICIT) | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Current liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Accounts payable | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 22 |
| | $ | 158 |
| | $ | 10 |
| | $ | (6 | ) | | $ | 184 |
|
Securitization obligations | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 327 |
| | — |
| | 327 |
|
Intercompany note payable | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 19 |
| | 6 |
| | (25 | ) | | — |
|
Due to former parent | — |
| | — |
| | 80 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 80 |
|
Revolving credit facility and current portion of long-term debt | — |
| | — |
| | 267 |
| | 50 |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | 325 |
|
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 202 |
| | 282 |
| | 36 |
| | — |
| | 520 |
|
Intercompany payables | — |
| | — |
| | 2,222 |
| | (2,203 | ) | | (19 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Total current liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 2,793 |
| | (1,694 | ) | | 368 |
| | (31 | ) | | 1,436 |
|
Long-term debt | — |
| | — |
| | 6,825 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6,825 |
|
Deferred income taxes | — |
| | — |
| | (604 | ) | | 1,025 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 421 |
|
Other non-current liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 83 |
| | 61 |
| | 23 |
| | — |
| | 167 |
|
Intercompany liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 727 |
| | (727 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Total liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 9,824 |
| | (1,335 | ) | | 391 |
| | (31 | ) | | 8,849 |
|
Total equity (deficit) | (1,499 | ) | | (1,499 | ) | | (1,499 | ) | | 8,216 |
| | 181 |
| | (5,399 | ) | | (1,499 | ) |
Total liabilities and equity (deficit) | $ | (1,499 | ) | | $ | (1,499 | ) | | $ | 8,325 |
| | $ | 6,881 |
| | $ | 572 |
| | $ | (5,430 | ) | | $ | 7,350 |
|
Consolidating Balance Sheet
December 31, 2010
(in millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Holdings | | Intermediate | | Realogy | | Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Eliminations | | Consolidated |
ASSETS | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Current assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 69 |
| | $ | 74 |
| | $ | 51 |
| | $ | (2 | ) | | $ | 192 |
|
Trade receivables, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 79 |
| | 35 |
| | — |
| | 114 |
|
Relocation receivables | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 386 |
| | — |
| | 386 |
|
Relocation properties held for sale | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 21 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 21 |
|
Deferred income taxes | — |
| | — |
| | 15 |
| | 63 |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | 76 |
|
Intercompany note receivable | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 13 |
| | 19 |
| | (32 | ) | | — |
|
Other current assets | — |
| | — |
| | 9 |
| | 69 |
| | 31 |
| | — |
| | 109 |
|
Total current assets | — |
| | — |
| | 93 |
| | 319 |
| | 520 |
| | (34 | ) | | 898 |
|
Property and equipment, net | — |
| | — |
| | 21 |
| | 162 |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 186 |
|
Goodwill | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,296 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3,296 |
|
Trademarks | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 732 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 732 |
|
Franchise agreements, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,764 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,764 |
|
Other intangibles, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 478 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 478 |
|
Other non-current assets | — |
| | — |
| | 80 |
| | 83 |
| | 52 |
| | — |
| | 215 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries | (1,063 | ) | | (1,063 | ) | | 8,023 |
| | 152 |
| | — |
| | (6,049 | ) | | — |
|
Total assets | $ | (1,063 | ) | | $ | (1,063 | ) | | $ | 8,217 |
| | $ | 6,986 |
| | $ | 575 |
| | $ | (6,083 | ) | | $ | 7,569 |
|
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY (DEFICIT) | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Current liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Accounts payable | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 25 |
| | $ | 168 |
| | $ | 12 |
| | $ | (2 | ) | | $ | 203 |
|
Securitization obligations | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 331 |
| | — |
| | 331 |
|
Intercompany note payable | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 19 |
| | 13 |
| | (32 | ) | | — |
|
Due to former parent | — |
| | — |
| | 104 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 104 |
|
Revolving credit facility and current portion of long-term debt | — |
| | — |
| | 132 |
| | 55 |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | 194 |
|
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 178 |
| | 316 |
| | 31 |
| | — |
| | 525 |
|
Intercompany payables | — |
| | — |
| | 1,949 |
| | (1,962 | ) | | 13 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Total current liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 2,388 |
| | (1,404 | ) | | 407 |
| | (34 | ) | | 1,357 |
|
Long-term debt | — |
| | — |
| | 6,698 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6,698 |
|
Deferred income taxes | — |
| | — |
| | (614 | ) | | 1,028 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 414 |
|
Other non-current liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 86 |
| | 61 |
| | 16 |
| | — |
| | 163 |
|
Intercompany liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 722 |
| | (722 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Total liabilities | — |
| | — |
| | 9,280 |
| | (1,037 | ) | | 423 |
| | (34 | ) | | 8,632 |
|
Total equity (deficit) | (1,063 | ) | | (1,063 | ) | | (1,063 | ) | | 8,023 |
| | 152 |
| | (6,049 | ) | | (1,063 | ) |
Total liabilities and equity (deficit) | $ | (1,063 | ) | | $ | (1,063 | ) | | $ | 8,217 |
| | $ | 6,986 |
| | $ | 575 |
| | $ | (6,083 | ) | | $ | 7,569 |
|
Consolidating Statement of Cash Flows
Year Ended December 31, 2011
(in millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Holdings | | Intermediate | | Realogy | | Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Eliminations | | Consolidated |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (666 | ) | | $ | 414 |
| | $ | 74 |
| | $ | (14 | ) | | $ | (192 | ) |
Investing Activities | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Property and equipment additions | — |
| | — |
| | (5 | ) | | (43 | ) | | (1 | ) | | — |
| | (49 | ) |
Net assets acquired (net of cash acquired) and acquisition-related payments | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (6 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (6 | ) |
Proceeds from (purchase of) certificates of deposit, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (3 | ) | | 8 |
| | — |
| | 5 |
|
Change in restricted cash | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | 6 |
|
Intercompany note receivable | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | (7 | ) | | — |
|
Other, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (5 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (5 | ) |
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities | — |
| | — |
| | (4 | ) | | (50 | ) | | 12 |
| | (7 | ) | | (49 | ) |
Financing Activities | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in revolving credit facilities | — |
| | — |
| | 150 |
| | (5 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | 145 |
|
Proceeds from the issuance of First and a Half Lien Notes | — |
| | — |
| | 700 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 700 |
|
Proceeds from term loan extensions | — |
| | — |
| | 98 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 98 |
|
Repayments of term loan credit facility | — |
| | — |
| | (706 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (706 | ) |
Repayment of prior securitization obligations | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (299 | ) | | — |
| | (299 | ) |
Proceeds from new securitization obligations | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 295 |
| | — |
| | 295 |
|
Net change in securitization obligations | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Debt issuance costs | — |
| | — |
| | (34 | ) | | — |
| | (1 | ) | | — |
| | (35 | ) |
Intercompany dividend | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (10 | ) | | 10 |
| | — |
|
Intercompany note payable | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (7 | ) | | 7 |
| | — |
|
Intercompany transactions | — |
| | — |
| | 392 |
| | (343 | ) | | (49 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Other, net | — |
| | — |
| | 3 |
| | (10 | ) | | 1 |
| | — |
| | (6 | ) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | — |
| | — |
| | 603 |
| | (358 | ) | | (70 | ) | | 17 |
| | 192 |
|
Effect of changes in exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | — |
| | — |
| | (67 | ) | | 6 |
| | 16 |
| | (4 | ) | | (49 | ) |
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period | — |
| | — |
| | 69 |
| | 74 |
| | 51 |
| | (2 | ) | | 192 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 80 |
| | $ | 67 |
| | $ | (6 | ) | | $ | 143 |
|
Consolidating Statement of Cash Flows
Year Ended December 31, 2010
(in millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Holdings | | Intermediate | | Realogy | | Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Eliminations | | Consolidated |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (638 | ) | | $ | 504 |
| | $ | 24 |
| | $ | (8 | ) | | $ | (118 | ) |
Investing Activities | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Property and equipment additions | — |
| | — |
| | (7 | ) | | (41 | ) | | (1 | ) | | — |
| | (49 | ) |
Net assets acquired (net of cash acquired) and acquisition-related payments | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (17 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (17 | ) |
Proceeds from sale of assets | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 5 |
|
Purchase of certificates of deposit | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (9 | ) | | — |
| | (9 | ) |
Net cash used in investing activities | — |
| | — |
| | (7 | ) | | (53 | ) | | (10 | ) | | — |
| | (70 | ) |
Financing Activities | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in revolving credit facilities | — |
| | — |
| | 100 |
| | 35 |
| | 7 |
| | — |
| | 142 |
|
Repayments of term loan credit facility | — |
| | — |
| | (32 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (32 | ) |
Net change in securitization obligations | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 27 |
| | — |
| | 27 |
|
Intercompany dividend | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (11 | ) | | 11 |
| | — |
|
Intercompany transactions | — |
| | — |
| | 454 |
| | (428 | ) | | (26 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Other, net | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (8 | ) | | (3 | ) | | — |
| | (13 | ) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | — |
| | — |
| | 520 |
| | (401 | ) | | (6 | ) | | 11 |
| | 124 |
|
Effect of changes in exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | 1 |
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | — |
| | — |
| | (125 | ) | | 50 |
| | 9 |
| | 3 |
| | (63 | ) |
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period | — |
| | — |
| | 194 |
| | 24 |
| | 42 |
| | (5 | ) | | 255 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 69 |
| | $ | 74 |
| | $ | 51 |
| | $ | (2 | ) | | $ | 192 |
|
Consolidating Statement of Cash Flows
Year Ended December 31, 2009
(in millions)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Holdings | | Intermediate | | Realogy | | Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries | | Eliminations | | Consolidated |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (583 | ) | | $ | 309 |
| | $ | 650 |
| | $ | (35 | ) | | $ | 341 |
|
Investing Activities | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Property and equipment additions | — |
| | — |
| | (4 | ) | | (36 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (40 | ) |
Net assets acquired (net of cash acquired) and acquisition-related payments | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (5 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (5 | ) |
Change in restricted cash | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | (2 | ) |
Intercompany dividend | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 63 |
| | — |
| | (63 | ) | | — |
|
Intercompany note receivable | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 37 |
| | — |
| | (37 | ) | | — |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities | — |
| | — |
| | (4 | ) | | 59 |
| | (2 | ) | | (100 | ) | | (47 | ) |
Financing Activities | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in revolving credit facilities | — |
| | — |
| | (515 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (515 | ) |
Proceeds from issuance of Second Lien Loans | — |
| | — |
| | 500 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 500 |
|
Repayments of term loan credit facility | — |
| | — |
| | (32 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (32 | ) |
Net change in securitization obligations | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (410 | ) | | — |
| | (410 | ) |
Debt issuance costs | — |
| | — |
| | (11 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (11 | ) |
Intercompany dividend | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (96 | ) | | 96 |
| | — |
|
Intercompany note payable | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (37 | ) | | 37 |
| | — |
|
Intercompany transactions | — |
| | — |
| | 463 |
| | (364 | ) | | (99 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
Other, net | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (6 | ) | | (3 | ) | | — |
| | (11 | ) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | — |
| | — |
| | 403 |
| | (370 | ) | | (645 | ) | | 133 |
| | (479 | ) |
Effect of changes in exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 3 |
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | — |
| | — |
| | (184 | ) | | (2 | ) | | 6 |
| | (2 | ) | | (182 | ) |
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period | — |
| | — |
| | 378 |
| | 26 |
| | 36 |
| | (3 | ) | | 437 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 194 |
| | $ | 24 |
| | $ | 42 |
| | $ | (5 | ) | | $ | 255 |
|
20. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS (UNAUDITED)
2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering
On February 2, 2012, Realogy issued $593 million of First Lien Notes with an interest rate of 7.625% and $325 million of New First and a Half Lien Notes with an interest rate of 9.00%, the proceeds of which were used to repay amounts outstanding under its senior secured credit facility. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are senior secured obligations of the Company and will mature on January 15, 2020. Interest is payable semiannually on January 15 and July 15 of each year, commencing July 15, 2012. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes were issued in a private offering that is exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act.
The Company used the proceeds from the offering of approximately $918 million to: (i) prepay $629 million of its non-extended term loan borrowings under its senior secured credit facility which were due to mature in October 2013, (ii) repay all of the $133 million in outstanding borrowings under its non-extended revolving credit facility which was due to mature in April 2013, and (iii) repay $156 million of the outstanding borrowings under its extended revolving credit facility. In conjunction with the repayments of $289 million described in clauses (ii) and (iii), the Company reduced the commitments under its non-extended revolving credit facility by a like amount, thereby terminating the non-extended revolving credit facility.
The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are guaranteed on a senior secured basis by Domus Intermediate Holdings Corp., Realogy's parent, and each domestic subsidiary of Realogy that is a guarantor under its senior secured credit facility and certain of its outstanding securities. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are also guaranteed by Holdings, on an unsecured senior subordinated basis. The First Lien Notes and the New First and a Half Lien Notes are secured by substantially the same collateral as Realogy's existing obligations under its senior secured credit facility. The priority of the collateral liens securing the First Lien Notes is (i) equal to the collateral liens securing Realogy's first lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility and (ii) senior to the collateral liens securing Realogy's other secured obligations that are not secured by a first priority lien, including the First and a Half Lien Notes, and Realogy's second lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility. The priority of the collateral liens securing the New First and a Half Lien Notes is (i) junior to the collateral liens securing Realogy's first lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility and the First Lien Notes, (ii) equal to the collateral liens securing the Existing First and a Half Lien Notes, and (iii) senior to the collateral liens securing Realogy's second lien obligations under its senior secured credit facility.
Pro forma Indebtedness Table
The debt table below gives effect to the 2012 Senior Secured Notes Offering as if it occurred on December 31, 2011.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest Rate | | Expiration Date | | Total Capacity | | Outstanding Borrowings | | Available Capacity |
Senior Secured Credit Facility: | | | | | | | | | |
Extended revolving credit facility (1) | (2) | | April 2016 | | 363 |
| | 97 |
| | 172 |
|
Extended term loan facility | (3) | | October 2016 | | 1,822 |
| | 1,822 |
| | — |
|
First Lien Notes | 7.625% | | January 2020 | | 593 |
| | 593 |
| | — |
|
Existing First and a Half Lien Notes | 7.875% | | February 2019 | | 700 |
| | 700 |
| | — |
|
New First and a Half Lien Notes | 9.00% | | January 2020 | | 325 |
| | 325 |
| | — |
|
Second Lien Loans | 13.50% | | October 2017 | | 650 |
| | 650 |
| | — |
|
Other bank indebtedness (4) | | | Various | | 133 |
| | 133 |
| | — |
|
Existing Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
Senior Notes | 10.50% | | April 2014 | | 64 |
| | 64 |
| | — |
|
Senior Toggle Notes | 11.00% | | April 2014 | | 52 |
| | 52 |
| | — |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes (5) | 12.375% | | April 2015 | | 190 |
| | 187 |
| | — |
|
Extended Maturity Notes: | | | | | | | | | |
Senior Notes (6) | 11.50% | | April 2017 | | 492 |
| | 489 |
| | — |
|
Senior Notes (7) | 12.00% | | April 2017 | | 130 |
| | 129 |
| | — |
|
Senior Subordinated Notes | 13.375% | | April 2018 | | 10 |
| | 10 |
| | — |
|
Convertible Notes | 11.00% | | April 2018 | | 2,110 |
| | 2,110 |
| | — |
|
Securitization obligations: (8) | | | | | | | | | |
Apple Ridge Funding LLC | | | December 2013 | | 400 |
| | 296 |
| | 104 |
|
Cartus Financing Limited (9) | | | Various | | 62 |
| | 31 |
| | 31 |
|
| | | | | $ | 8,096 |
| | $ | 7,688 |
| | $ | 307 |
|
_______________
| |
(1) | The available capacity under this facility was reduced by $94 million of outstanding letters of credit after taking into consideration the $25 million reduction in letters of credit backed revolving credit borrowings that occurred in January 2012. On February 27, 2012, the Company had $55 million outstanding on the extended revolving credit facility and $81 million of outstanding letters of credit. |
| |
(2) | Interest rates with respect to revolving loans under the senior secured credit facility are based on, at Realogy’s option, adjusted LIBOR plus 2.25% (or with respect to the extended revolving loans, 3.25%) or ABR plus 1.25% (or with respect to the extended revolving loans, 2.25%) in each case subject to reductions based on the attainment of certain leverage ratios. |
| |
(3) | Interest rates with respect to term loans under the senior secured credit facility are based on, at Realogy’s option, (a) adjusted LIBOR plus 3.0% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 4.25%) or (b) the higher of the Federal Funds Effective Rate plus 0.5% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 1.75%) and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s prime rate (“ABR”) plus 2.0% (or with respect to the extended term loans, 3.25%). |
| |
(4) | Consists of revolving credit facilities that are supported by letters of credit issued under the senior secured credit facility, $75 million due in July 2012, $8 million due in August 2012 and $50 million due in January 2013. |
| |
(5) | Consists of $190 million of 12.375% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2015, less a discount of $3 million. |
| |
(6) | Consists of $492 million of 11.50% Senior Notes due 2017, less a discount of $3 million. |
| |
(7) | Consists of $130 million of 12.00% Senior Notes due 2017, less a discount of $1 million. |
| |
(8) | Available capacity is subject to maintaining sufficient relocation related assets to collateralize these securitization obligations. |
| |
(9) | Consists of a £35 million facility which expires in August 2015 and a £5 million working capital facility which expires in August 2012. |
Additional Shares Reserved for the Stock Incentive Plan
As of February 24, 2012, there were 0.9 million shares of Class A Common Stock reserved for issuance under the Amended and Restated Holdings 2007 Stock Incentive Plan, including approximately 0.7 million shares reserved for issuance upon exercise of outstanding options and approximately 0.2 million shares reserved for future grants under the plan. On February 27, 2012, the Holdings Compensation Committee approved a further amendment and restatement of the plan to increase the number of shares reserved thereunder by approximately 0.8 million, thereby increasing the total number of shares reserved for issuance to approximately 1.7 million.
Exhibit Index
Exhibit Description
| |
31.1 | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer of Realogy Holdings Corp. pursuant to Rules 13(a)-14(a) and 15(d)-14(a) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
| |
31.2 | Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of Realogy Holdings Corp. pursuant to Rules 13(a)-14(a) and 15(d)-14(a) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
| |
31.3 | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer of Realogy Corporation pursuant to Rules 13(a)-14(a) and 15(d)-14(a) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
| |
31.4 | Certification of the Chief Financial Officer of Realogy Corporation pursuant to Rules 13(a)-14(a) and 15(d)-14(a) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. |
| |
32.1 | Certification for Realogy Holdings Corp. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
| |
32.2 | Certification for Realogy Corporation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
| |
101.INS ^ | XBRL Instance Document |
| |
101.SCH ^ | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document |
| |
101.CAL^ | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document |
| |
101.DEF ^ | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document |
| |
101.LAB ^ | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document |
| |
101.PRE ^ | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document |
_______________
| |
^ | Furnished electronically with this report. |