form10q.htm
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION
13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009
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 number: 1-34167
ePlus inc.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
54-1817218
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
13595 Dulles Technology
Drive, Herndon, VA 20171-3413
(Address,
including zip code, of principal executive offices)
Registrant's
telephone number, including area code: (703)
984-8400
Title of each class
|
Name of each exchange on which
registered
|
Common
Stock, $.01 par value
|
Nasdaq
Global Market
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes o No x
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 of Section 15(d) of the Act.
Yes o No x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days.
Yes x No o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (Section 229.405 of
this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that
the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes o No o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting
company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated
filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act.
Large
accelerated filer £
|
Accelerated
filer £
|
Non-accelerated
filer £ (Do not
check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Smaller
reporting company T
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in
Rule
12b-2 of
the Exchange Act). Yes £ No T
The
number of shares of common stock outstanding as of July 31, 2009 was
8,224,315.
ePlus inc. AND
SUBSIDIARIES
Part I. Financial
Information:
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part
II. Other Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cautionary
Language About Forward-Looking Statements
This
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains certain statements that are, or may be
deemed to be, “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are made in reliance upon the protections
provided by such acts for forward-looking statements. Such statements are not
based on historical fact, but are based upon numerous assumptions about future
conditions that may not occur. Forward-looking statements are generally
identifiable by use of forward-looking words such as “may,” “should,” “intend,”
“estimate,” “will,” “potential,” “could,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,”
“project,” “forecast,” and similar expressions. Readers are cautioned not to
place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements made by us or on our
behalf. Forward-looking statements are made based upon information that is
currently available or management’s current expectations and beliefs concerning
future developments and their potential effects upon us, speak only as of the
date hereof, and are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. We
do not undertake any obligation to publicly update or correct any
forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that subsequently
occur, or of which we hereafter become aware. Actual events, transactions and
results may materially differ from the anticipated events, transactions or
results described in such statements. Our ability to consummate such
transactions and achieve such events or results is subject to certain risks and
uncertainties. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the
matters set forth below:
|
·
|
we
offer a comprehensive set of solutions—the bundling of our direct IT
sales, professional services and financing with our proprietary software,
and may encounter some of the challenges, risks, difficulties and
uncertainties frequently faced by similar companies, such
as:
|
|
·
|
managing
a diverse product set of solutions in highly competitive
markets;
|
|
·
|
increasing
the total number of customers utilizing bundled solutions by up-selling
within our customer base and gaining new
customers;
|
|
·
|
adapting
to meet changes in markets and competitive
developments;
|
|
·
|
maintaining
and increasing advanced professional services by retaining highly skilled
personnel and vendor
certifications;
|
|
·
|
integrating
with external IT systems, including those of our customers and vendors;
and
|
|
·
|
continuing
to enhance our proprietary software and update our technology
infrastructure to remain competitive in the
marketplace.
|
|
·
|
our
ability to hire and retain sufficient qualified
personnel;
|
|
·
|
a
decrease in the capital spending budgets of, or delay of technology
purchases by, our customers or potential
customers;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to protect our intellectual
property;
|
|
·
|
the
creditworthiness of our customers;
|
|
·
|
reduction
of vendor incentive programs;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to raise capital, maintain, or increase as needed, our lines of
credit or floor planning facilities, or obtain non-recourse financing for
our transactions;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to realize our investment in leased
equipment;
|
|
·
|
our
ability to reserve adequately for credit losses;
and
|
|
·
|
significant
adverse changes in, reductions in, or losses of relationships with major
customers or vendors.
|
We cannot
be certain that our business strategy will be successful or that we will
successfully address these and other challenges, risks and
uncertainties. For a further list and description of various risks,
relevant factors and uncertainties that could cause future results or
events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in our
forward-looking statements, see the “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” sections
contained elsewhere in this report, as well as our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009, any subsequent Reports on Form 10-Q
and Form 8-K, and other filings with the SEC.
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item
1. Financial Statements
ePlus inc. AND
SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
As
of
|
|
|
As
of
|
|
|
|
June
30, 2009
|
|
|
March
31, 2009
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
103,323 |
|
|
$ |
107,788 |
|
Accounts
receivable—net
|
|
|
85,253 |
|
|
|
82,734 |
|
Notes
receivable
|
|
|
4,013 |
|
|
|
2,632 |
|
Inventories—net
|
|
|
13,801 |
|
|
|
9,739 |
|
Investment
in leases and leased equipment—net
|
|
|
123,260 |
|
|
|
119,256 |
|
Property
and equipment—net
|
|
|
3,014 |
|
|
|
3,313 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
15,696 |
|
|
|
16,809 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
21,601 |
|
|
|
21,601 |
|
TOTAL
ASSETS
|
|
$ |
369,961 |
|
|
$ |
363,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable—equipment
|
|
$ |
6,940 |
|
|
$ |
2,904 |
|
Accounts
payable—trade
|
|
|
19,262 |
|
|
|
18,833 |
|
Accounts
payable—floor plan
|
|
|
57,182 |
|
|
|
45,127 |
|
Accrued
expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
29,341 |
|
|
|
33,588 |
|
Income
taxes payable
|
|
|
1,715 |
|
|
|
912 |
|
Recourse
notes payable
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
Non-recourse
notes payable
|
|
|
75,061 |
|
|
|
84,977 |
|
Deferred
tax liability
|
|
|
2,957 |
|
|
|
2,957 |
|
Total
Liabilities
|
|
|
192,560 |
|
|
|
189,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES (Note 7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS'
EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock, $.01 par value; 2,000,000 shares authorized; none issued or
outstanding
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Common
stock, $.01 par value; 25,000,000 shares authorized; 11,618,272 issued and
8,201,618 outstanding at June 30, 2009 and 11,504,167 issued and 8,088,513
outstanding at March 31, 2009
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
80,982 |
|
|
|
80,055 |
|
Treasury
stock, at cost, 3,416,591 and 3,415,654 shares,
respectively
|
|
|
(37,240 |
) |
|
|
(37,229 |
) |
Retained
earnings
|
|
|
133,353 |
|
|
|
131,452 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income—foreign currency translation
adjustment
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
Total
Stockholders' Equity
|
|
|
177,401 |
|
|
|
174,472 |
|
TOTAL
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
$ |
369,961 |
|
|
$ |
363,872 |
|
See
Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
ePlus inc.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
Three
months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(amounts
in thousands, except shares and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVENUES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
of product and services
|
|
$ |
140,450 |
|
|
$ |
165,759 |
|
Sales
of leased equipment
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
|
|
1,265 |
|
|
|
|
141,938 |
|
|
|
167,024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease
revenues
|
|
|
8,075 |
|
|
|
11,625 |
|
Fee
and other income
|
|
|
2,407 |
|
|
|
3,637 |
|
|
|
|
10,482 |
|
|
|
15,262 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
REVENUES
|
|
|
152,420 |
|
|
|
182,286 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COSTS
AND EXPENSES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales, product and services
|
|
|
120,571 |
|
|
|
143,717 |
|
Cost
of leased equipment
|
|
|
1,410 |
|
|
|
1,226 |
|
|
|
|
121,981 |
|
|
|
144,943 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct
lease costs
|
|
|
2,548 |
|
|
|
3,794 |
|
Professional
and other fees
|
|
|
1,817 |
|
|
|
2,545 |
|
Salaries
and benefits
|
|
|
17,925 |
|
|
|
19,464 |
|
General
and administrative expenses
|
|
|
3,506 |
|
|
|
3,788 |
|
Interest
and financing costs
|
|
|
1,305 |
|
|
|
1,485 |
|
|
|
|
27,101 |
|
|
|
31,076 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
COSTS AND EXPENSES (1)
|
|
|
149,082 |
|
|
|
176,019 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EARNINGS
BEFORE PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES
|
|
|
3,338 |
|
|
|
6,267 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROVISION
FOR INCOME TAXES
|
|
|
1,437 |
|
|
|
2,574 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET
EARNINGS
|
|
$ |
1,901 |
|
|
$ |
3,693 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET
EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE—BASIC
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
NET
EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE—DILUTED
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED
AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING—BASIC
|
|
|
8,147,685 |
|
|
|
8,253,552 |
|
WEIGHTED
AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING—DILUTED
|
|
|
8,415,531 |
|
|
|
8,580,659 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
amounts to related parties of $283 and $278 for the three months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
|
See
Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
ePlus inc.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
Three
Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
Cash
Flows From Operating Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
earnings
|
|
$ |
1,901 |
|
|
$ |
3,693 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net earnings to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
3,071 |
|
|
|
4,290 |
|
Reserves
for credit losses and sales returns
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Provision
for inventory allowances and inventory returns
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
Share-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Excess
tax benefit from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
(82) |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
Tax
benefit of stock options exercised
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
Payments
from lessees directly to lenders—operating
leases
|
|
|
(2,001 |
) |
|
|
(2,835 |
) |
Loss
on disposal of property and equipment
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Gain
on sale or disposal of operating lease equipment
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
(372 |
) |
Increase
in cash value of officers' life insurance
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Changes
in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable—net
|
|
|
(3,035 |
) |
|
|
(2,431 |
) |
Notes
receivable
|
|
|
(1,381 |
) |
|
|
(5,805 |
) |
Inventories—net
|
|
|
(4,228 |
) |
|
|
455 |
|
Investment
in direct financing and sale-type leases—net
|
|
|
(15,507 |
) |
|
|
(9,274 |
) |
Other
assets
|
|
|
1,351 |
|
|
|
(5,411 |
) |
Accounts
payable—equipment
|
|
|
4,012 |
|
|
|
(501 |
) |
Accounts
payable—trade
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
3,011 |
|
Salaries
and commissions payable, accrued expenses and other
liabilities
|
|
|
(3,474 |
) |
|
|
3,266 |
|
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(18,326 |
) |
|
|
(11,731 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
Flows From Investing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds
from sale or disposal of operating lease equipment
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
Purchases
of operating lease equipment
|
|
|
(395 |
) |
|
|
(1,302 |
) |
Purchases
of property and equipment
|
|
|
(167 |
) |
|
|
(231 |
) |
Premiums
paid on officers' life insurance
|
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
(79 |
) |
Cash
used in acquisition, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(364 |
) |
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(124 |
) |
|
|
(1,226 |
) |
ePlus inc. AND
SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS - continued
(UNAUDITED)
|
|
Three
Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Cash
Flows From Financing Activities:
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-recourse
|
|
|
2,508 |
|
|
|
16,299 |
|
Repayments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-recourse
|
|
|
(1,210 |
) |
|
|
(1,757 |
) |
Repurchase
of common stock
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Proceeds
from issuance of capital stock through option exercise
|
|
|
743 |
|
|
|
343 |
|
Excess
tax benefit from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
Net
borrowings on floor plan facility
|
|
|
12,055 |
|
|
|
1,420 |
|
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
14,168 |
|
|
|
16,371 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect
of Exchange Rate Changes on Cash
|
|
|
(183 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(Decrease) Increase in Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
|
(4,465 |
) |
|
|
3,425 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and Cash Equivalents, Beginning of Period
|
|
|
107,788 |
|
|
|
58,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and Cash Equivalents, End of Period
|
|
$ |
103,323 |
|
|
$ |
61,848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
Disclosures of Cash Flow Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid for interest
|
|
$ |
123 |
|
|
$ |
141 |
|
Cash
paid for income taxes
|
|
$ |
759 |
|
|
$ |
2,432 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Schedule
of Non-Cash Investing and Financing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase
of property and equipment included in accounts payable
|
|
$ |
117 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
Purchase
of operating lease equipment included in accounts payable
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
Principal
payments from lessees directly to lenders
|
|
$ |
11,257 |
|
|
$ |
12,842 |
|
See
Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
ePlus inc. AND
SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1.
ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements of ePlus inc. and subsidiaries
and notes thereto included herein are unaudited and have been prepared by us,
pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”) and reflect all adjustments that are, in the opinion of management,
necessary for a fair statement of results for the interim periods. All
adjustments made were of a normal recurring nature.
Certain
information and note disclosures normally included in the financial statements
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States (“U.S. GAAP”) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to SEC rules
and regulations.
These
interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated
Financial Statements and Notes thereto contained in our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended March 31, 2009, which was filed on June 16,
2009. Operating results for the interim periods are not necessarily
indicative of results for an entire year. A detailed description of
the Company’s significant accounting policies can be found in the audited
financial statements for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009, included in the
Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K. There have been no other
significant changes to the accounting policies that were included in the
Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31,
2009.
PRINCIPLES
OF CONSOLIDATION — The Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
include the accounts of ePlus inc. and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany balances and transactions have been
eliminated.
SUBSEQUENT
EVENTS –
Management has evaluated subsequent events after the balance sheet date through
the financial statement issuance date for appropriate accounting and
disclosure.
COMPREHENSIVE
INCOME — Comprehensive income consists of net income and foreign currency
translation adjustments. For the three months ended June 30, 2009,
other comprehensive income was $112 thousand, and net income was $1.9 million.
This resulted in total comprehensive income of $2.0 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2009. For the three months ended June 30, 2008, other
comprehensive income was $11 thousand, and net income was $3.7 million. This
resulted in total comprehensive income of $3.7 million for the three months
ended June 30, 2008.
RECENTLY ADOPTED ACCOUNTING
PRONOUNCEMENTS — In February 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards
Board ("FASB") issued FASB Staff Position ("FSP") No. 157-2, "Effective Date of FASB Statement No.
157" ("FSP No. 157-2"), which delayed the effective date of SFAS No. 157
for all non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except for those
items that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements
on a recurring basis, until fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008. On
April 1, 2009, we adopted FSP No. 157-2 and SFAS No. 157 as it applies to
those non-financial assets and liabilities. The adoption did not
have a material impact on our financial statements.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS
No. 141R”), which replaces SFAS No. 141. SFAS No. 141R (i) applies to all
transactions in which an entity obtains control of one or more businesses,
including those without the transfer of consideration, (ii) defines the acquirer
as the entity that obtains control on the acquisition date, (iii) requires the
measurement at fair value of the acquired assets, assumed liabilities and
noncontrolling interest, (iv) requires that the acquisition and restructuring
related costs be recognized separately from the business combinations, and (v)
requires that goodwill be recognized as of the acquisition date, measured as
residual, which in most cases will result in the excess of consideration plus
acquisition-date fair value of noncontrolling interest over the fair values of
identifiablenet assets. In addition, under SFAS No. 141R,
“negative goodwill,” in which consideration given is less than the
acquisition-date fair value of identifiable net assets, will be recognized as a
gain to the acquirer. SFAS No. 141R is applied prospectively to business
combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the first annual
reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. We adopted
SFAS No. 141R on April 1, 2009. The adoption of SFAS No. 141R did not
impact our financial statements for prior periods. Impact of the adoption of
SFAS No. 141R for financial statements in the future periods will depend on the
nature of acquisitions completed after April 1, 2009.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position (“FSP”) No. 141 R-1, “Accounting for Assets Acquired and
Liabilities Assumed in a Business Combination That Arise from
Contingencies,” (“FSP 141R-1”). FSP 141R-1 amends SFAS No.
141R by establishing a set of criteria to account for assets and liabilities
arising from contingencies in business combinations. Under FSP 141R-1, an
acquirer is required to recognize, at fair value, an asset acquired or a
liability assumed in a business combination that arises from a contingency if
the acquisition-date fair value of that asset or liability can be determined
during the measurement period. If the acquisition-date fair value cannot be
determined, then the acquirer should follow the recognition criteria in SFAS No.
5, “Accounting for
Contingencies,” and FASB Interpretation No. 14, “Reasonable Estimation of the Amount
of a Loss – an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 5.” We adopted FSP
141R-1 on April 1, 2009. The adoption of FSP 141R-1 did not impact
our financial statements for prior periods. Impact of the adoption of SFAS No.
141R for financial statements in the future periods will depend on the nature of
acquisitions completed after April 1, 2009.
In April
2008, the FASB issued FSP No. 142-3, “Determination of the Useful Life of
Intangible Asset.”(“FSP No. 142-3”). FSP No. 142-3 amends the
factors that should be considered in developing renewal or extension assumptions
used to determine the useful life of a recognized intangible asset under SFAS
No. 142. FSP No. 142-3 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December
15, 2008 and interim periods within those fiscal years. FSP No. 142-3
(i) requires companies to consider whether renewal can be completed without
substantial cost or material modification of the existing terms and conditions
associated with the asset and (ii) replaces the previous useful life criteria
with a new requirement-that an entity consider its own historical experience in
renewing similar arrangements. If historical experience does not exist, then we
would consider market participant assumptions regarding renewal including
highest and best use of the asset by a market participant and adjustments for
other entity-specific factors included in SFAS No. 142. We adopted FSP No. 142-3
on April 1, 2009. The adoption of FSP No. 142-3 did not have a
material impact on our financial statements.
In April
2009, the FASB issued FSP No. FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, "Interim Disclosures about Fair Value
of Financial Instruments" ("FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1"). FSP FAS 107-1
and APB 28-1 require companies to disclose in interim financial statements the
fair value of financial instruments within the scope of FASB Statement No. 107,
“Disclosures about Fair Value
of Financial Instruments.” The fair-value information disclosed in the
footnotes must be presented together with the related carrying amount, making it
clear whether the fair value and carrying amount represent assets or liabilities
and how the carrying amount relates to what is reported in the balance sheet.
FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1 also requires that companies disclose the method or
methods and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value of financial
instruments and a discussion of changes, if any, in the method or methods and
significant assumptions during the period. FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1 are
effective for interim and annual periods ending after June 15,
2009. We adopted the disclosure requirements of FSP FAS 107-1 and APB
28-1 for the quarter ended June 30, 2009. The adoption of FSP FAS
107-1 and APB 28-1 did not have a material impact on our financial
statements.
In
November 2008, the FASB ratified EITF No. 08-7, “Accounting for Defensive Intangible
Assets” (“EITF 08-7”). EITF 08-7 clarifies the accounting for certain
separately identifiable intangible assets which an acquirer does not intend to
actively use but intends to hold to prevent its competitors from obtaining
access to them. EITF 08-7 requires an acquirer in a business combination to
account for a defensive intangible asset as a separate unit of accounting which
should be amortized to expense over the period the asset diminishes in value.
EITF 08-7 was effective for us on April 1, 2009. The adoption of EITF 08-7 did
not have a material impact on our financial statements; however, EITF 08-7 could
have a material effect on the way we account for intangible assets acquired in
future acquisitions. Impact of the adoption of EITF 08-7 for financial
statements in the future periods will depend on the nature of intangible assets
acquired in acquisitions completed after April 1, 2009.
In May
2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 165, "Subsequent Events" ("SFAS No.
165"). SFAS No. 165 sets forth the period after the balance sheet date during
which management of a reporting entity should evaluate events or transactions
that may occur for potential recognition or disclosure in the financial
statements, the circumstances under which an entity should recognize events or
transactions occurring after the balance sheet date in its financial statements,
and the disclosures that an entity should make about events or transactions that
occurred after the balance sheet date. SFAS No. 165 will be effective for the
interim or annual period ending after June 15, 2009 and will be applied
prospectively. We adopted SFAS No. 165 for the quarter ended June 30,
2009. SFAS No. 165 requires that public entities evaluate subsequent
events through the date that the financial statements are issued. We have
evaluated subsequent events through the time of filing these financial
statements with the SEC on August 10, 2009.
RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS NOT
YET ADOPTED —In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 168 "The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles - A
Replacement of FASB Statement No. 162" ("SFAS No. 168"). SFAS No. 168
establishes the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“Codification”) as the
single source of authoritative U.S. GAAP recognized by the FASB to be applied by
nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive releases of the SEC under
authority of federal securities laws are also sources of authoritative U.S. GAAP
for SEC registrants. SFAS No. 168 and the Codification are effective for
financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after
September 15, 2009. When effective, the Codification will supersede all existing
non-SEC accounting and reporting standards. All other non-grandfathered, non-SEC
accounting literature not included in the Codification will become
non-authoritative. Following SFAS No. 168, the FASB will not issue new standards
in the form of Statements, FASB Staff Positions, or Emerging Issues Task Force
Abstracts. Instead, the FASB will issue Accounting Standards Updates, which will
serve only to: (a) update the Codification; (b) provide background information
about the guidance; and (c) provide the bases for conclusions on the change(s)
in the Codification. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS 168 to have a
material impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition or
cash flows.
In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 166, “Accounting for Transfers of
Financial Assets—an amendment of FASB Statement No. 140” (“SFAS No.
166”), which removes the concept of a qualifying special-purpose entity from
FASB Statement No. 140, “Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities” (“SFAS
No. 140”). This Statement clarifies the determination
on whether a transferor and all of the entities included in the
transferor’s financial statements being presented have surrendered control over
the transferred financial assets. That determination must consider the
transferor’s continuing involvement in the transferred financial asset,
including all arrangements or agreements made contemporaneously with, or in
contemplation of, the transfer, even if they were not entered into at the time
of the transfer. SFAS No. 166 will be effective for interim and annual reporting
periods beginning after November 15, 2009. We are currently evaluating the
future impact SFAS No. 166 will have on our consolidated results of operations
or financial condition.
2.
INVESTMENT IN LEASES AND LEASED EQUIPMENT—NET
Investment
in leases and leased equipment—net consists of the following:
|
|
As
of
|
|
|
|
June
30, 2009
|
|
|
March
31, 2009
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
Investment
in direct financing and sales-type leases—net
|
|
$ |
103,005 |
|
|
$ |
96,741 |
|
Investment
in operating lease equipment—net
|
|
|
20,255 |
|
|
|
22,515 |
|
|
|
$ |
123,260 |
|
|
$ |
119,256 |
|
INVESTMENT
IN DIRECT FINANCING AND SALES-TYPE LEASES—NET
Our
investment in direct financing and sales-type leases—net consists of the
following:
|
|
As
of
|
|
|
|
June
30, 2009
|
|
|
March
31, 2009
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
Minimum
lease payments
|
|
$ |
101,205 |
|
|
$ |
93,840 |
|
Estimated
unguaranteed residual value (1)
|
|
|
12,535 |
|
|
|
13,001 |
|
Initial
direct costs, net of amortization (2)
|
|
|
826 |
|
|
|
859 |
|
Less: Unearned
lease income
|
|
|
(9,963 |
) |
|
|
(9,360 |
) |
Reserve
for credit losses
|
|
|
(1,598 |
) |
|
|
(1,599 |
) |
Investment
in direct financing and sales-type leases—net
|
|
$ |
103,005 |
|
|
$ |
96,741 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
estimated unguaranteed residual values of $2,234 thousand and $1,790
thousand as of June 30, 2009 and March 31, 2009, respectively, for
direct-financing leases accounted for under SFAS No.
140.
|
(2)
|
Initial
direct costs are shown net of amortization of $1,041 thousand and $940
thousand as of June 30, 2009 and March 31, 2009,
respectively.
|
Our net
investment in direct financing and sales-type leases is collateral for
non-recourse and recourse equipment notes, if any.
INVESTMENT
IN OPERATING LEASE EQUIPMENT—NET
Investment
in operating lease equipment—net primarily represents leases that do not qualify
as direct financing leases or are leases that are short-term renewals on a
month-to-month basis. The components of the net investment in operating lease
equipment are as follows:
|
|
As
of
|
|
|
|
June
30, 2009
|
|
|
March
31, 2009
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
Cost
of equipment under operating leases
|
|
$ |
51,736 |
|
|
$ |
53,227 |
|
Less: Accumulated
depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(31,481 |
) |
|
|
(30,712 |
) |
Investment
in operating lease equipment—net (1)
|
|
$ |
20,255 |
|
|
$ |
22,515 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
estimated unguaranteed residual values of $13,653 thousand and $14,178
thousand as of June 30, 2009 and March 31, 2009, respectively, for
operating leases.
|
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we sold portions of our lease
portfolio. The sales were reflected on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements as sales of leased equipment totaling approximately $1.5
million and $1.3 million, and cost of leased equipment of $1.4 million and $1.2
million for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
There was a corresponding reduction of investment in leases and lease
equipment—net of $1.4 million and $1.2 million at June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
3.
GOODWILL
Our
annual impairment test for goodwill is performed during the third quarter of our
fiscal year, or when events or circumstances indicate there might be impairment,
and follow the two-step process prescribed in SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets,” (“SFAS No. 142”). As of June 30, 2009, no indicators
of impairment have been identified. We will continue to monitor the market, our
operational performance and general economic conditions. A downward trend
in one or more of these factors could cause us to reduce the estimated fair
value of our reporting units and recognize a future corresponding impairment of
our goodwill. At June 30, 2009, our goodwill balance was $21.6
million.
4.
RESERVES FOR CREDIT LOSSES
As of
March 31, 2009 and June 30, 2009, our activity in our reserves for credit losses
is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Accounts
Receivable
|
|
|
Lease-Related
Assets
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Balance
March 31, 2009
|
|
$ |
1,493 |
|
|
$ |
1,599 |
|
|
$ |
3,092 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision
for Bad Debts
|
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(68 |
) |
Recoveries
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Write-offs
and other
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
Balance
June 30, 2009
|
|
$ |
1,444 |
|
|
$ |
1,598 |
|
|
$ |
3,042 |
|
Included
in our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations are increases in
bad debt expense of $68 thousand for the three months ended June 30,
2009.
5.
RECOURSE AND NON-RECOURSE NOTES PAYABLE
As of
June 30, 2009 and March 31, 2009, recourse and non-recourse obligations
consisted of the following:
|
|
As
of
|
|
|
|
June
30, 2009
|
|
|
March
31, 2009
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Bank of Highland Park recourse note payable at 5.5% expires on April 1,
2011 or when the early termination option of a lease is
enacted.
|
|
$ |
102 |
|
|
$ |
102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-recourse
equipment notes secured by related investments in leases with interest
rates ranging from 5.66% to 9.00% for the three months ended June 30,
2009 and 4.34% to 8.76% for the year ended March 31,
2009
|
|
$ |
75,061 |
|
|
$ |
84,977 |
|
Principal
and interest payments on the recourse and non-recourse notes payable are
generally due monthly in amounts that are approximately equal to the total
payments due from the lessee under the leases that collateralize the notes
payable. Under recourse financing, in the event of a default by a lessee, the
lender has recourse against the lessee, the equipment serving as collateral, and
us. Under non-recourse financing, in the event of a default by a lessee, the
lender generally only has recourse against the lessee, and the equipment serving
as collateral, but not against us.
Our
technology sales business segment, through our subsidiary ePlus Technology, inc., finances its
operations with funds generated from operations, and with a credit facility with
GE Commercial Distribution Finance Corporation (“GECDF”). This facility provides
short-term capital for our reseller business. There are two components of the
GECDF credit facility: (1) a floor plan component and (2) an accounts receivable
component. Under the floor plan component, we had outstanding balances of $57.2
million and $45.1 million as of June 30, 2009 and March 31, 2009, respectively.
Under the accounts receivable component, we had no outstanding balances as of
June 30, 2009 and March 31, 2009. As of June 30, 2009, the facility agreement
had an aggregate limit of the two components of $125 million, and the accounts
receivable component had a sub-limit of $30 million, which bears interest at
prime less 0.5%, or 4.75%. Availability under the GECDF facility may be limited
by the asset value of equipment we purchase or accounts receivable, and may be
further limited by certain covenants and terms and conditions of the facility.
These covenants include, but are not limited to, a minimum total tangible net
worth and subordinated debt, and maximum debt to tangible net worth ratio of
ePlus Technology, inc. We were in
compliance with these covenants as of June 30, 2009. Either party may terminate
with 90 days’ advance notice.
The
facility provided by GECDF requires a guaranty of up to $10.5 million by ePlus inc. The guaranty requires ePlus inc. to deliver its annual audited
financial statements by certain dates. We have delivered the annual audited
financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2009, as required. The loss of
the GECDF credit facility could have a material adverse effect on our future
results as we currently rely on this facility and its components for daily
working capital and liquidity for our technology sales business and as an
operational function of our accounts payable process.
National
City Bank (a wholly-owned subsidiary of PNC Financial Services Group, Inc.)
provided a credit facility which could have been used for all ePlus inc.’s subsidiaries. This credit
facility expired July 10, 2009. Borrowings under our $35 million line of credit
from National City Bank were subject to certain covenants. We had no balance on
this facility as of the expiration date. Any borrowings on this facility would
have been secured by our assets.
6.
RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, we leased approximately 55,880 square feet
for use as our principal headquarters from Norton Building 1, LLC for a monthly
payment of approximately $89 thousand which includes rent and operating
expenses. Norton Building 1, LLC is a limited liability company owned
in part by Mr. Norton’s spouse and in part in trust for his children. Mr.
Norton, our President and CEO, has no managerial or executive role in Norton
Building 1, LLC. On June 18, 2009, we entered into Amendment No. 2 to
the office lease agreement with Norton Building 1, LLC pursuant to which we will
continue to lease 55,880 square feet for use as our principal
headquarters. The term of the amended lease will begin January 1,
2010, and will continue for five years from such date. In addition,
we have the right to terminate the lease on December 31, 2012 in the event that
the facility no longer meets our needs, by giving six months’ prior written
notice, with no penalty fee. The annual base rent, which includes an
expenses factor, is $21.50 per square foot for the first year, with an annual
rent escalation for operating cost increases, if any, plus 2.75% of the annual
base rent, net of the expenses factor, for each year thereafter. The
amended lease was approved by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
in accordance with our Related Person Transaction Policy, and was subsequently
approved by our Board of Directors, with Mr. Norton
abstaining. During the three months ended June 30, 2009 and June 30,
2008, we paid rent, which includes operating expenses, in the amount of $283
thousand and $278 thousand respectively
7.
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Litigation
We have
been involved in several matters relating to a customer named Cyberco Holdings,
Inc. (“Cyberco”). The Cyberco principals were perpetrating a scam, and at least
five principals have pled guilty to criminal conspiracy and/or related charges,
including bank fraud, mail fraud and money laundering. One lender who financed
our transaction with Cyberco, Banc of America Leasing and Capital, LLC (“BoA”),
filed a lawsuit against ePlus inc. in
the Circuit Court for Fairfax County, Virginia on November 3, 2006, seeking to
enforce a guaranty in which ePlus inc.
guaranteed ePlus Group’s obligations to
BoA relating to the Cyberco transaction. The suit has been stayed pending the
resolution of other Cyberco-related matters. We are vigorously defending this
suit. As we do not believe a loss is probable or the amount is reasonably
estimable, we have not accrued for this matter.
On July
31, 2009, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
dismissed the shareholder derivative action which had been filed on January 18,
2007. The action, which related to stock option practices, named ePlus inc. as nominal defendant and personally
named eight individual defendants who are directors and/or executive officers of
ePlus inc. The action alleged violations
of federal securities law, and various state law claims such as breach of
fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment, and sought
monetary damages from the individual defendants and that we take certain
corrective actions relating to option grants and corporate governance, and
attorneys’ fees.
On May
19, 2009, we filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia against four defendants, alleging that they used or
sold products, methods, processes, services and/or systems that infringe on
certain of our patents. We entered into a settlement agreement with
one defendant, effective as of July 7, 2009, wherein the complaint was dismissed
with prejudice with regard to that specific defendant, and that defendant was
granted a license in specified ePlus
patents. With regard to the remaining defendants, we are seeking
injunctive relief and an unspecified amount of monetary damages.
We are
also engaged in other ordinary and routine litigation incidental to our
business. While we cannot predict the outcome of these various legal
proceedings, management does not believe that the ultimate resolution will have
a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash
flows.
Regulatory
and Other Legal Matters
In August
2006, the Audit Committee voluntarily contacted and advised the staff of the SEC
that it had commenced an investigation of our stock option grants since our
initial public offering in 1996 and that a restatement would be
required. This restatement was included in our Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended March 31, 2006, and was filed with the SEC on August 16, 2007.
The SEC opened an informal inquiry, and subsequently notified us by letter dated
June 17, 2009 that its informal inquiry has been completed and that the Staff
does not intend to recommend any enforcement action against us.
8.
EARNINGS PER SHARE
Earnings
per share (“EPS”) have been calculated in accordance with SFAS No. 128, “Earnings per Share” (“SFAS
No. 128”). Additional shares included in the diluted EPS calculations are
attributable to incremental shares issuable upon the assumed exercise of stock
options and other common stock equivalents. Under SFAS No. 128, share options
and nonvested shares under a share-based compensation arrangement are considered
options for purposes of computing diluted EPS.
The
following table provides a reconciliation of the numerators and denominators
used to calculate basic and diluted net income per common share as disclosed on
our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 (in thousands, except per share
data).
|
|
Three
months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income available to common shareholders—basic and diluted
|
|
$ |
1,901 |
|
|
$ |
3,693 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding — basic
|
|
|
8,148 |
|
|
|
8,254 |
|
Effect
of dilutive shares
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding — diluted
|
|
$ |
8,416 |
|
|
$ |
8,581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
Unexercised
employee stock options for 195,000 and 290,507 shares of our common stock were
not included in the computations of diluted EPS for the three months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively, because the options’ exercise prices were
greater than the average market price of our common stock during the applicable
periods.
9.
SHARE REPURCHASE
On July
31, 2008, our Board authorized a share repurchase plan commencing after August
4, 2008. The share repurchase plan was for a 12-month period ending August 4,
2009 for up to 500,000 shares of ePlus’
outstanding common stock. The previous stock repurchase program expired on
November 17, 2006. On February 11, 2009, our Board of Directors amended our
current share repurchase plan, which commenced August 4, 2008. The plan, as
amended, has been extended through September 15, 2009, and we may repurchase up
to 500,000 shares of ePlus’ outstanding
common stock beginning February 12, 2009. The purchases may be made from time to
time in the open market, or in privately negotiated transactions, subject to
availability. Any repurchased shares will have the status of treasury shares and
may be used, when needed, for general corporate purposes.
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, we repurchased 937 shares of our
outstanding common stock at an average cost of $11.00 per share for a total
purchase price of $10 thousand. Since the inception of our initial repurchase
program on September 20, 2001, as of June 30, 2009, we have repurchased
3,416,591 shares of our outstanding common stock at an average cost of $10.90
per share for a total purchase price of $37.2 million.
10.
SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION
Share-Based
Plans
We have
issued share-based awards under the following plans: (1) the 1998 Long-Term
Incentive Plan (the “1998 LTIP”), (2) Amendment and Restatement of the 1998
Stock Incentive Plan (2001) (the “Amended LTIP (2001)”), (3) Amendment and
Restatement of the 1998 Stock Incentive Plan (2003) (the “Amended LTIP (2003)”),
(4) the 2008 Non-Employee Director Long-Term Incentive Plan (“2008 Director
LTIP”) and (5) the 2008 Employee Long-Term Incentive Plan (“2008 Employee
LTIP”). However, we no longer issue awards under the 1998 LTIP, the Amended LTIP
(2001), or the Amended LTIP (2003). Currently, awards are only issued under the
2008 Director LTIP and the 2008 Employee LTIP. Sections of these plans are
summarized below. All the share-based plans require the use of the previous
trading day’s closing price when the grant date falls on a date the stock was
not traded.
Vesting
periods varied for the 1998 LTIP, the Amended LTIP (2001), and the Amended LTIP
(2003) depending on individual award agreement. Vesting periods for the 2008
Director LTIP and the 2008 Employee LTIP are discussed below.
1998
Long-Term Incentive Plan
The 1998
LTIP was adopted by the Board on July 28, 1998, which is its effective date, and
approved by the shareholders on September 16, 1998. The allowable number of
shares under the 1998 LTIP was 20% of the outstanding shares, less shares
previously granted and shares purchased through our then-existing employee stock
purchase program. It specified that options shall be priced at not less than
fair market value. The 1998 LTIP consolidated our preexisting stock incentive
plans and made the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors
(“Compensation Committee”) responsible for its administration. The 1998 LTIP
required that grants be evidenced in writing, but the writing was not a
condition precedent to the grant of the award.
Under the
1998 LTIP, options were to be automatically awarded to non-employee directors
the day after the annual shareholders meeting to all non-employee directors in
service as of that day. No automatic annual grants may be awarded under the LTIP
after September 1, 2006. The LTIP also permits for discretionary option awards
to directors.
Amended
and Restated 1998 Long-Term Incentive Plan
Minor
amendments were made to the 1998 LTIP on April 1, April 17 and April 30, 2001.
The amendments change the name of the plan from the 1998 Long-Term Incentive
Plan to the Amended and Restated 1998 Long-Term Incentive Plan. In addition,
provisions were added “to allow the Compensation Committee to delegate to a
single board member the authority to make awards to non-Section 16 insiders, as
a matter of convenience,” and to provide that “no option granted under the Plan
may be exercisable for more than ten years from the date of its
grant.”
The
Amended LTIP (2001) was amended on July 15, 2003 by the Board and approved by
the stockholders on September 18, 2003. Primarily, the amendment modified the
aggregate number of shares available under the plan to a fixed number
(3,000,000). Although the language varies somewhat from earlier plans, it
permits the Board or Compensation Committee to delegate authority to a committee
of one or more directors who are also officers of the corporation to award
options under certain conditions. The Amended LTIP (2003) replaced all the prior
plans, and covered option grants for employees, executives and outside
directors.
On
September 15, 2008, our shareholders approved the 2008 Director LTIP and the
2008 Employee LTIP. Both of the plans were adopted by the Board on June 25,
2008. As a result of the approval of these plans, we will not grant any awards
under the Amended LTIP (2003) or any earlier plan.
2008
Non-Employee Director Plan
Under the
2008 Director LTIP, 250,000 shares were authorized for grant to non-employee
directors. The purpose of the 2008 Director LTIP is to align the economic
interests of the directors with the interests of shareholders by including
equity as a component of pay and to attract, motivate and retain experienced and
knowledgeable directors. Under the 2008 Director LTIP, each non-employee
director received a one-time grant of a
number of restricted shares of common stock having a grant-date fair value of
$35 thousand. The grant-date fair value for this one-time grant was determined
based on the share closing price on September 25, 2008. In addition, each
director will receive an annual grant of restricted stock having a grant-date
fair value equal to the cash compensation earned by an outside director during
our fiscal year ended immediately before the respective annual grant-date.
Directors may elect to receive their cash compensation in restricted stock.
These restricted shares are prohibited from being sold, transferred, assigned,
pledged or otherwise encumbered or disposed of. Half of these shares will vest
on the one-year and second-year anniversary from the date of the
grant.
2008
Employee Long-Term Incentive Plan
Under the
2008 Employee LTIP, 1,000,000 shares were authorized for grant of incentive
stock options, nonqualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted
stock, restricted stock units, performance awards, and other share-based awards
to ePlus employees. The
purposes of the 2008 Employee LTIP are to encourage our employees to acquire a
proprietary interest in the growth and performance of ePlus, thus enhancing the
value of ePlus for the
benefit of its stockholders, and to enhance our ability to attract and retain
exceptionally qualified individuals. The 2008 Employee LTIP is administered by
the Compensation Committee. Shares issuable under the 2008 Employee LTIP may
consist of authorized but unissued shares or shares held in our treasury. Shares
under the 2008 Employee LTIP will not be used to compensate our outside
directors, who may be compensated under the separate 2008 Director LTIP, as
discussed above. As of June 30, 2009, we have not granted any awards under the
2008 Employee LTIP. Under the 2008 Employee LTIP, the Compensation Committee
will determine the time and method of exercise of the awards.
Stock
Option Activity
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, there were no stock options
granted to employees.
|
|
Number
of Shares
|
|
|
Exercise
Price Range
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Contractual Life Remaining (in years)
|
|
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding,
April 1, 2009
|
|
|
908,280 |
|
|
$ |
6.23
- $17.38 |
|
|
$ |
10.29 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
$ |
2,403,133 |
|
Options
granted
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Options
exercised (1)
|
|
|
(114,105 |
) |
|
$ |
6.86
- $13.00 |
|
|
$ |
7.65 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
693,918 |
|
Options
forfeited
|
|
|
(1,100 |
) |
|
$ |
9.00
- $17.38 |
|
|
$ |
16.61 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Outstanding,
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
793,075 |
|
|
$ |
6.23
- $17.38 |
|
|
$ |
10.67 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
$ |
3,557,044 |
|
Vested
or expected to vest at June 30, 2009
|
|
|
793,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10.67 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
$ |
3,557,044 |
|
Exercisable,
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
793,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10.67 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
$ |
3,557,044 |
|
(1)
|
The
total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during the three months
ended June 30, 2009 was $694
thousand.
|
Additional
information regarding stock options outstanding as of June 30, 2009 is as
follows:
|
|
|
Options
Outstanding
|
|
|
Options
Exercisable
|
|
Range
of Exercise Prices
|
|
|
Options
Outstanding
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price per Share
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Contractual Life Remaining
|
|
|
Options
Exercisable
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
6.23
- $9.00 |
|
|
|
452,585 |
|
|
$ |
7.60 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
452,585 |
|
|
$ |
7.60 |
|
$ |
9.01
- $13.50 |
|
|
|
145,500 |
|
|
$ |
11.80 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
145,500 |
|
|
$ |
11.80 |
|
$ |
13.51
- $17.38 |
|
|
|
195,000 |
|
|
$ |
16.94 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
195,000 |
|
|
$ |
16.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
6.23
- $17.38 |
|
|
|
793,085 |
|
|
$ |
10.67 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
793,085 |
|
|
$ |
10.67 |
|
We issue
shares from our authorized but unissued common stock to satisfy stock option
exercises. At June 30, 2009, all of our options are
vested.
Restricted
Stock
Under the
2008 Director LTIP, each director will receive an annual grant of restricted
stock having a grant-date fair value equal to the cash compensation earned by an
outside director during our fiscal year ended immediately before the respective
annual grant-date. Directors may elect to receive their cash
compensation in restricted stock. These restricted shares are
prohibited from being sold, transferred, assigned, pledged or otherwise
encumbered or disposed of. These shares will be vested over a
two-year period and we will recognize share-based compensation expense over the
service period. We estimate the forfeiture rate of the restricted stock to be
zero.
A summary
of restricted stock activity during the three months ended June 30, 2009 is as
follows:
|
|
Number
of Shares
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Grant-date Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding,
March 31, 2009
|
|
|
38,532 |
|
|
$ |
10.90 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
granted (1)
|
|
|
2,244 |
|
|
$ |
11.69 |
|
Shares
forfeited
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding,
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
40,776 |
|
|
$ |
10.94 |
|
|
(1)
|
Three
of our directors received restricted shares in lieu of their cash
compensation. Therefore, during the three months ended June 30,
2009, the directors were issued 748 shares each with a grant-date fair
value of $11.69 per share.
|
Share-based
Compensation Expense
We
account for share-based compensation expense in accordance with SFAS No. 123
(revised 2004), “Share-Based
Payment” (“SFAS No. 123R”). We use the Black-Scholes option-pricing model
to value all options and the straight-line method to amortize this fair value as
compensation cost over the requisite service period.
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, we recognized $56 thousand of total
share-based compensation expense, all of which was related to restricted
stock. This amount was recorded as professional and other fees in our
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.
During
the three months ended June 30, 2008, we recognized $31 thousand of total
share-based compensation expense, all of which was related to stock options.
There was no share-based compensation expense related to restricted stock for
the three months ended June 30, 2008. This amount was recorded as salaries and
benefits in our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
At June
30, 2009, there was no unrecognized compensation expense related to nonvested
options because all the options were vested. Unrecognized compensation expense
related to the restricted stock was $282 thousand which will be fully recognized
over the next 21 months.
11.
INCOME TAXES
We
account for tax positions related to income taxes subject to SFAS 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes”
in accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 48 “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes” (“FIN 48”).
As of
June 30, 2009, our gross FIN 48 tax liability was $525 thousand. We expect that
the gross unrecognized tax benefit will decrease by approximately $67 thousand
in the next 12 months.
In
accordance with our accounting policy, we recognize accrued interest and
penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits as a component of tax expense.
This policy did not change as a result of the adoption of FIN 48. Our Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months ended June
30, 2009 includes additional interest of $9 thousand.
12.
FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The
following disclosure of the estimated fair value of our financial instruments is
in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 107, “Disclosures About Fair Value of
Financial Instruments.” The valuation methods we used are set forth
below.
The
accuracy and usefulness of the fair value information disclosed herein is
limited by the following factors:
— These
estimates are subjective in nature and involve uncertainties and matters of
significant judgment and, therefore, cannot be determined with precision.
Changes in assumptions could significantly affect the estimates.
— These
estimates do not reflect any premium or discount that could result from offering
for sale at one time our entire holding of a particular financial
asset.
— SFAS
No. 107 excludes from its disclosure requirements lease contracts and various
significant assets and liabilities that are not considered to be financial
instruments.
Because
of these and other limitations, the aggregate fair value amounts presented in
the following table do not represent the underlying value. We determine the fair
value of notes payable by applying an average portfolio debt rate and applying
such rate to future cash flows of the respective financial instruments. The fair
value of cash and cash equivalents is determined to equal the book
value.
The
carrying amounts and estimated fair values of our financial instruments are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
As
of June 30, 2009
|
|
|
As
of March 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
Carrying
Amount
|
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
|
Carrying
Amount
|
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
103,323 |
|
|
$ |
103,323 |
|
|
$ |
107,788 |
|
|
$ |
107,788 |
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
85,253 |
|
|
|
85,253 |
|
|
|
82,734 |
|
|
|
82,734 |
|
Notes
receivable
|
|
|
4,013 |
|
|
|
4,013 |
|
|
|
2,632 |
|
|
|
2,632 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
83,384 |
|
|
|
83,384 |
|
|
|
66,864 |
|
|
|
66,864 |
|
Accrued
expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
29,341 |
|
|
|
29,341 |
|
|
|
33,588 |
|
|
|
33,588 |
|
Non-recourse
notes payable
|
|
|
75,061 |
|
|
|
74,711 |
|
|
|
84,977 |
|
|
|
84,551 |
|
Recourse
notes payable
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
13.
SEGMENT REPORTING
We manage
our business segments on the basis of the products and services offered. Our
reportable segments consist of our traditional financing business unit and
technology sales business unit. The financing business unit offers
lease-financing solutions to corporations and governmental entities nationwide.
The technology sales business unit sells information technology equipment and
software and related services primarily to corporate customers on a nationwide
basis. The technology sales business unit also provides Internet-based
business-to-business supply chain management solutions for information
technology and other operating resources. We evaluate segment performance on the
basis of segment net earnings.
Both
segments utilize our proprietary software and services throughout the
organization. Sales and services and related costs of our software are included
in the technology sales business unit.
|
|
Three
months ended June 30, 2009
|
|
|
Three
months ended June 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
Technology
Sales Business Segment
|
|
|
Financing
Business Segment
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Technology
Sales Business Segment
|
|
|
Financing
Business Segment
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
of product and services
|
|
$ |
139,992 |
|
|
$ |
458 |
|
|
$ |
140,450 |
|
|
$ |
164,028 |
|
|
$ |
1,731 |
|
|
$ |
165,759 |
|
Sales
of leased equipment
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,265 |
|
|
|
1,265 |
|
Lease
revenues
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,075 |
|
|
|
8,075 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11,625 |
|
|
|
11,625 |
|
Fee
and other income
|
|
|
2,257 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
2,407 |
|
|
|
3,530 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
3,637 |
|
Total
revenues
|
|
|
142,249 |
|
|
|
10,171 |
|
|
|
152,420 |
|
|
|
167,558 |
|
|
|
14,728 |
|
|
|
182,286 |
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
120,063 |
|
|
|
1,918 |
|
|
|
121,981 |
|
|
|
142,628 |
|
|
|
2,315 |
|
|
|
144,943 |
|
Direct
lease costs
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,548 |
|
|
|
2,548 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3,794 |
|
|
|
3,794 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
19,934 |
|
|
|
3,314 |
|
|
|
23,248 |
|
|
|
21,587 |
|
|
|
4,210 |
|
|
|
25,797 |
|
Segment
earnings
|
|
|
2,252 |
|
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
|
4,643 |
|
|
|
3,343 |
|
|
|
4,409 |
|
|
|
7,752 |
|
Interest
and financing costs
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
1,287 |
|
|
|
1,305 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
1,465 |
|
|
|
1,485 |
|
Earnings
before income taxes
|
|
$ |
2,234 |
|
|
$ |
1,104 |
|
|
$ |
3,338 |
|
|
$ |
3,323 |
|
|
$ |
2,944 |
|
|
$ |
6,267 |
|
Assets
|
|
$ |
185,832 |
|
|
$ |
184,129 |
|
|
$ |
369,961 |
|
|
$ |
157,431 |
|
|
$ |
235,034 |
|
|
$ |
392,465 |
|
Included
in the financing business segment above are inter-segment accounts receivable of
$37.5 million and $48.8 million at June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. Included in the technology sales business segment
above are inter-segment accounts payable of $37.5 million and $48.8 million
at June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
For the
three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, our technology sales business segment
sold products to our financing business segment of $0.3 million and $0.4
million, respectively.
14.
SUBSEQUENT EVENT
On May
19, 2009, we filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia against four defendants, alleging that they used or
sold products, methods, processes, services and/or systems that infringe on
certain of our patents. Effective as of July 7, 2009, we entered into
a settlement agreement with one defendant wherein the complaint was dismissed
with prejudice with regard to that specific defendant, and that defendant was
granted a license in specified ePlus
patents. With regard to the remaining defendants, we are seeking
injunctive relief and an unspecified amount of monetary
damages.
Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations
This
discussion is intended to further the reader’s understanding of the consolidated
financial condition and results of operations of our company. It should be
read in conjunction with the financial statements included in this quarterly
report on Form 10-Q and our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended March
31, 2009 (the “2009 Annual Report”). These historical financial statements
may not be indicative of our future performance. This Management’s Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contains a number
of forward-looking statements, all of which are based on our current
expectations and could be affected by the uncertainties and risks described in
Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors,” in our 2009 Annual Report.
EXECUTIVE
OVERVIEW
Business
Description
ePlus and its consolidated
subsidiaries provide leading IT products and services, flexible leasing
solutions, and enterprise supply management to enable our customers to optimize
their IT infrastructure and supply chain processes. Our revenues are composed of
sales of product and services, sales of leased equipment, lease revenues and fee
and other income. Our operations are conducted through two business segments:
our technology sales business unit and our financing business unit.
Financial
Summary
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, total revenue decreased 16.4% to $152.4
million compared to the three months ended June 30, 2008, as a
result of an overall softening in the economy, which delayed our
customers’ investment in capital equipment. Total costs and expenses
decreased 15.3% to $149.1 million as compared to the three months ended June 30,
2008. During the three months ended June 30, 2009, net earnings
decreased 48.5% to $1.9 million as compared to the same period in
2008. Gross margin for product and services improved from 13.3% to
14.2% during the three months ended June 30, 2009. Our gross margin
on sales of product and services was affected by our customers’ investment in
technology equipment, the mix and volume of products sold and changes in
incentives provided to us by manufacturers. Cash decreased $4.5
million or 4.1% to $103.3 million at June 30, 2009 compared to March 31, 2009.
The
United States and other countries around the world have been experiencing
deteriorating economic conditions, including unprecedented financial market
disruption. As a result of the financial crisis in the credit markets, softness
in the housing markets, difficulties in the financial services sector and
continuing economic uncertainties, the direction and relative strength of the
U.S. economy has become increasingly uncertain. This has caused our current and
potential customers to delay or reduce technology purchases, which has reduced
sales of our products and services. Continuing deterioration of economic
conditions could cause our current and potential customers to further delay or
reduce technology purchases and result in longer sales cycles, slower adoption
of new technologies and increased price competition. Restrictions on credit may
impact economic activity and our results. Credit risk associated with our
customers and vendors may also be adversely impacted. In addition, although we
do not anticipate the need for additional capital in the near term due to our
current financial position, financial market disruption may adversely affect our
access to additional capital.
Business
Unit Overview
Technology
Sales Business Unit
The
technology sales business unit sells information technology equipment and
software and related services primarily to corporate customers on a nationwide
basis. The technology sales business unit also provides Internet-based
business-to-business supply chain management solutions for information
technology and other operating resources.
Our
technology sales business unit derives revenue from the sales of new equipment
and service engagements. These revenues are reflected on our Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations under sales of product and services and
fee and other income. Many customers purchase information technology equipment
from us using Master Purchase Agreements (“MPAs”) in which the terms and
conditions of our relationship are stipulated. Some MPAs contain pricing
arrangements. However, the MPAs do not contain purchase volume commitments and
most have 30-day termination for convenience clauses. Our other customers place
orders using purchase orders without an MPA in place. A substantial portion of
our sales of product and services are from sales of CISCO, Hewlett Packard and
Sun Microsystem products, which represent approximately 35%, 18% and 8% of
sales, respectively, for the three months ended June 30, 2009.
Included
in the sales of product and services in our technology sales business unit are
certain service revenues that are bundled with sales of equipment and are
integral to the successful delivery of such equipment. Our service engagements
are generally governed by Statements of Work and/or Master Service Agreements.
They are primarily fixed fee; however, some service agreements are based on time
and materials or estimates.
We
endeavor to minimize the cost of sales in our technology sales business unit
through vendor consideration programs provided by manufacturers. The programs
are generally governed by our reseller authorization level with the
manufacturer. The authorization level we achieve and maintain governs the types
of products we can resell as well as such items as pricing received, funds
provided for the marketing of these products and other special promotions. These
authorization levels are achieved by us through sales volume, certifications
held by sales executives or engineers and/or contractual commitments by us. The
authorizations are costly to maintain and these programs continually change and,
therefore, there is no guarantee of future reductions of costs provided by these
vendor consideration programs. We currently maintain the following authorization
levels with our major manufacturers:
Manufacturer
|
|
Manufacturer Authorization
Level
|
|
|
|
Hewlett
Packard
|
|
HP
Preferred Elite Partner (National)
|
Cisco
Systems
|
|
Cisco
Gold DVAR (National)
|
|
|
Advanced
Wireless LAN
|
|
|
Advanced
Unified Communications
|
|
|
Advanced
Data Center Storage Networking
|
|
|
Advanced
Routing and Switching
|
|
|
Advanced
Security
|
|
|
ATP
Video Surveillance
|
|
|
ATP
Telepresence
|
|
|
ATP
Rich Media Communications
|
|
|
Master
Security Specialization
|
|
|
Master
UC Specialization
|
Microsoft
|
|
Microsoft
Gold (National)
|
Sun
Microsystems
|
|
Sun
SPA Executive Partner (National)
|
|
|
Sun
National Strategic DataCenter Authorized
|
IBM
|
|
Premier
IBM Business Partner (National)
|
Lenovo
|
|
Lenovo
Premium (National)
|
NetApp
|
|
NetApp
STAR Partner
|
Citrix
Systems, Inc.
|
|
Citrix
Gold
(National)
|
Through
our technology sales business unit we also generate revenue through hosting
arrangements and sales of our software. These revenues are reflected on our
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations under fee and other
income. In addition, fee and other income results from: (1) income from events
that occur after the initial sale of a financial asset; (2) remarketing fees;
(3) brokerage fees earned for the placement of financing transactions; (4) agent
fees received from various manufacturers; (5) settlement fees related to
disputes or litigation; and (6) interest and other miscellaneous
income.
Financing
Business Unit
The
financing business unit offers lease-financing solutions to corporations and
governmental entities nationwide. The financing business unit derives revenue
from leasing primarily information technology equipment and sales of leased
equipment. These revenues are reflected on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations under lease revenues and sales of leased
equipment.
Lease
revenues consist of rentals due under operating leases, amortization of unearned
income on direct financing and sales-type leases and sales of leased assets to
lessees. These transactions are accounted for in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 13, “Accounting for Leases” (“SFAS
No. 13”). Each lease is classified as either a direct financing lease,
sales-type lease, or operating lease, as appropriate. Under the direct financing
and sales-type lease methods, we record the net investment in leases, which
consists of the sum of the minimum lease payments, initial direct costs (direct
financing leases only), and unguaranteed residual value (gross investment) less
the unearned income. The difference between the gross investment and the cost of
the leased equipment for direct financing leases is recorded as unearned income
at the inception of the lease. The unearned income is amortized over the life of
the lease using the interest method. Under sales-type leases, the difference
between the fair value and cost of the leased property plus initial direct costs
(net margins) is recorded as revenue at the inception of the lease. For
operating leases, rental amounts are accrued on a straight-line basis over the
lease term and are recognized as lease revenue. SFAS No. 140, “Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities” (“SFAS
No. 140”), establishes criteria for determining whether a transfer of financial
assets in exchange for cash or other consideration should be accounted for as a
sale or as a pledge of collateral in a secured borrowing. Certain assignments of
direct financing leases we make on a non-recourse basis meet the criteria for
surrender of control set forth by SFAS No. 140 and have, therefore, been treated
as sales for financial statement purposes.
Sales of
leased equipment represent revenue from the sales to a third party other than
the lessee of equipment subject to a lease in which we are the lessor. Such sales
of equipment may have the effect of increasing revenues and net income during
the quarter in which the sale occurs, and reducing revenues and net income
otherwise expected in subsequent quarters. If the rental stream on such lease
has non-recourse debt associated with it, sales revenue is recorded at the
amount of consideration received, net of the amount of debt assumed by the
purchaser. If there is no non-recourse debt associated with the rental stream,
sales revenue is recorded at the amount of gross consideration received, and
costs of sales is recorded at the book value of the lease.
Fluctuations
in Revenues
Our
results of operations are susceptible to fluctuations for a number of reasons,
including, without limitation, customer demand for our products and services,
supplier costs, interest rate fluctuations, and differences between estimated
residual values and actual amounts realized related to the equipment we lease.
Operating results could also fluctuate as a result of the sale of equipment in
our lease portfolio prior to the expiration of the lease term to the lessee or
to a third party.
We have
expanded our product and service offerings under our comprehensive set of
solutions which represents the continued evolution of our original
implementation of our e-commerce products entitled ePlusSuite®. The expansion to
our bundled solution is a framework that combines our IT sales and professional
services, leasing and financing services, asset management software and
services, procurement software, and electronic catalog content management
software and services.
We expect
to expand or open new sales locations and hire additional staff for specific
targeted market areas in the near future whenever we can find both experienced
personnel and qualified geographic areas.
RECENT
ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In
February 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued FASB
Staff Position ("FSP") No. 157-2, "Effective Date of FASB Statement No.
157" ("FSP No. 157-2"), which delayed the effective date of SFAS No. 157
for all non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except for those
items that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements
on a recurring basis, until fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008. On
April 1, 2009, we adopted FSP No. 157-2 and SFAS No. 157 as it applies to
those non-financial assets and liabilities. The adoption did not
have a material impact on our financial statements.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS
No. 141R”), which replaces SFAS No. 141. SFAS No. 141R (i) applies to all
transactions in which an entity obtains control of one or more businesses,
including those without the transfer of consideration, (ii) defines the acquirer
as the entity that obtains control on the acquisition date, (iii) requires the
measurement at fair value of the acquired assets, assumed liabilities and
noncontrolling interest, (iv) requires that the acquisition and restructuring
related costs be recognized separately from the business combinations, and (v)
requires that goodwill be recognized as of the acquisition date, measured as
residual, which in most cases will result in the excess of consideration plus
acquisition-date fair value of noncontrolling interest over the fair values of
identifiablenet assets. In addition, under SFAS No. 141R,
“negative goodwill,” in which consideration given is less than the
acquisition-date fair value of identifiable net assets, will be recognized as a
gain to the acquirer. SFAS No. 141R is applied prospectively to business
combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the first annual
reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. We adopted
SFAS No. 141R on April 1, 2009. The adoption of SFAS No. 141R did not
impact our financial statements for prior periods. Impact of the adoption of
SFAS No. 141R for financial statements in the future periods will depend on the
nature of acquisitions completed after April 1, 2009.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position (“FSP”) No. 141 R-1, “Accounting for Assets Acquired and
Liabilities Assumed in a Business Combination That Arise from
Contingencies,” (“FSP 141R-1”). FSP 141R-1 amends SFAS No.
141R by establishing a set of criteria to account for assets and liabilities
arising from contingencies in business combinations. Under FSP 141R-1, an
acquirer is required to recognize, at fair value, an asset acquired or a
liability assumed in a business combination that arises from a contingency if
the acquisition-date fair value of that asset or liability can be determined
during the measurement period. If the acquisition-date fair value cannot be
determined, then the acquirer should follow the recognition criteria in SFAS No.
5, “Accounting for
Contingencies,” and FASB Interpretation No. 14, “Reasonable Estimation of the Amount
of a Loss – an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 5.” We adopted FSP
141R-1 on April 1, 2009. The adoption of FSP 141R-1 did not impact
our financial statements for prior periods. Impact of the adoption of SFAS No.
141R for financial statements in the future periods will depend on the nature of
acquisitions completed after April 1, 2009.
In April
2008, the FASB issued FSP No. 142-3, “Determination of the Useful Life of
Intangible Asset.”(“FSP No. 142-3”). FSP No. 142-3 amends the
factors that should be considered in developing renewal or extension assumptions
used to determine the useful life of a recognized intangible asset under SFAS
No. 142. FSP No. 142-3 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December
15, 2008 and interim periods within those fiscal years. FSP No. 142-3
(i) requires companies to consider whether renewal can be completed without
substantial cost or material modification of the existing terms and conditions
associated with the asset and (ii) replaces the previous useful life criteria
with a new requirement-that an entity consider its own historical experience in
renewing similar arrangements. If historical experience does not exist, then we
would consider market participant assumptions regarding renewal including
highest and best use of the asset by a market participant and adjustments for
other entity-specific factors included in SFAS No. 142. We adopted FSP No. 142-3
on April 1, 2009. The adoption of FSP No. 142-3 did not have a
material impact on our financial statements.
In April
2009, the FASB issued FSP No. FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, "Interim Disclosures about Fair Value
of Financial Instruments" ("FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1"). FSP FAS 107-1
and APB 28-1 require companies to disclose in interim financial statements the
fair value of financial instruments within the scope of FASB Statement No. 107,
“Disclosures about Fair Value
of Financial Instruments.” The fair-value information disclosed in the
footnotes must be presented together with the related carrying amount, making it
clear whether the fair value and carrying amount represent assets or liabilities
and how the carrying amount relates to what is reported in the balance sheet.
FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1 also requires that companies disclose the method or
methods and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value of financial
instruments and a discussion of changes, if any, in the method or methods and
significant assumptions during the period. FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1 are
effective for interim and annual periods ending after June 15,
2009. We adopted the disclosure requirements of FSP FAS 107-1 and APB
28-1 for the quarter ended June 30, 2009. The adoption of FSP FAS
107-1 and APB 28-1 did not have a material impact on our financial
statements.
In
November 2008, the FASB ratified EITF No. 08-7, “Accounting for Defensive Intangible
Assets” (“EITF 08-7”). EITF 08-7 clarifies the accounting for certain
separately identifiable intangible assets which an acquirer does not intend to
actively use but intends to hold to prevent its competitors from obtaining
access to them. EITF 08-7 requires an acquirer in a business combination to
account for a defensive intangible asset as a separate unit of accounting which
should be amortized to expense over the period the asset diminishes in value.
EITF 08-7 was effective for us on April 1, 2009. The adoption of EITF 08-7 did
not have a material impact on our financial statements; however, EITF 08-7 could
have a material effect on the way we account for intangible assets acquired in
future acquisitions. Impact of the adoption of EITF 08-7 for financial
statements in the future periods will depend on the nature of intangible assets
acquired in acquisitions completed after April 1, 2009.
In May
2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 165, "Subsequent Events" ("SFAS No.
165"). SFAS No. 165 sets forth the period after the balance sheet date during
which management of a reporting entity should evaluate events or transactions
that may occur for potential recognition or disclosure in the financial
statements, the circumstances under which an entity should recognize events or
transactions occurring after the balance sheet date in its financial statements,
and the disclosures that an entity should make about events or transactions that
occurred after the balance sheet date. SFAS No. 165 will be effective for the
interim or annual period ending after June 15, 2009 and will be applied
prospectively. We adopted SFAS No. 165 for the quarter ended June 30,
2009. SFAS No. 165 requires that public entities evaluate subsequent
events through the date that the financial statements are issued. We have
evaluated subsequent events through the time of filing these financial
statements with the SEC on August 10, 2009.
RECENT
ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS NOT YET ADOPTED
In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 168 "The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles - A
Replacement of FASB Statement No. 162" ("SFAS No. 168"). SFAS No. 168
establishes the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“Codification”) as the
single source of authoritative U.S. GAAP recognized by the FASB to be applied by
nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive releases of the SEC under
authority of federal securities laws are also sources of authoritative U.S. GAAP
for SEC registrants. SFAS No. 168 and the Codification are effective for
financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after
September 15, 2009. When effective, the Codification will supersede all existing
non-SEC accounting and reporting standards. All other non-grandfathered, non-SEC
accounting literature not included in the Codification will become
non-authoritative. Following SFAS No. 168, the FASB will not issue new standards
in the form of Statements, FASB Staff Positions, or Emerging Issues Task Force
Abstracts. Instead, the FASB will issue Accounting Standards Updates, which will
serve only to: (a) update the Codification; (b) provide background information
about the guidance; and (c) provide the bases for conclusions on the change(s)
in the Codification. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS 168 to have a
material impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition or
cash flows.
In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 166, “Accounting for Transfers of
Financial Assets—an amendment of FASB Statement No. 140” (“SFAS No.
166”), which removes the concept of a qualifying special-purpose entity from
FASB Statement No. 140, “Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities” (“SFAS
No. 140”). This Statement clarifies the determination
on whether a transferor and all of the entities included in the
transferor’s financial statements being presented have surrendered control over
the transferred financial assets. That determination must consider the
transferor’s continuing involvement in the transferred financial asset,
including all arrangements or agreements made contemporaneously with, or in
contemplation of, the transfer, even if they were not entered into at the time
of the transfer. SFAS No. 166 will be effective for interim and annual reporting
periods beginning after November 15, 2009. We are currently evaluating the
future impact SFAS No. 166 will have on our consolidated results of operations
or financial condition.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires
management to use judgment in the application of accounting policies, including
making estimates and assumptions. If our judgment or interpretation of the facts
and circumstances relating to various transactions had been different, or
different assumptions were made, it is possible that alternative accounting
policies would have been applied, resulting in a change in financial results. On
an ongoing basis, we reevaluate our estimates, including those related to
revenue recognition, residuals, vendor consideration, lease classification,
goodwill and intangibles, reserves for credit losses and income taxes
specifically relating to uncertain tax positions. Estimates in the assumptions
used in the valuation of our stock option expense are updated periodically and
reflect conditions that existed at the time of each new issuance of stock
options. We base estimates on historical experience and on various other
assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the
results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values
of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. For
all of these estimates, we caution that future events rarely develop exactly as
forecasted, and therefore, these estimates routinely require
adjustment.
We
consider the following accounting policies important in understanding the
potential impact of our judgments and estimates on our operating results and
financial condition. Our significant accounting policies, including the critical
policies and practices listed below, are more fully described and discussed in
the notes to consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year 2009 included
in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009,
filed with the SEC on June 16, 2009.
REVENUE
RECOGNITION. The majority of our revenues are derived from three sources: sales
of products and services, lease revenues and sales of our software. Our revenue
recognition policies vary based upon these revenue sources. We adhere to
guidelines and principles of sales recognition described in Staff Accounting
Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 104, “Revenue Recognition” (“SAB
No. 104”), issued by the staff of the SEC. Under SAB No. 104, sales are
recognized when the title and risk of loss are passed to the customer, there is
persuasive evidence of an arrangement for sale, delivery has occurred and/or
services have been rendered, the sales price is fixed or determinable and
collectability is reasonably assured. Using these tests, the vast majority of
our product sales are recognized upon delivery due to our sales terms with our
customers and with our vendors. For proper cutoff, we estimate the product
delivered to our customers at the end of each quarter based upon historical
delivery dates.
We also
sell services that are performed in conjunction with product sales, and
recognize revenue for these sales in accordance with EITF 00-21, “Accounting for Revenue Arrangements
with Multiple Deliverables.” Accordingly, we recognize sales from
delivered items only when the delivered item(s) has value to the client on
stand-alone basis, there is objective and reliable evidence of the fair value of
the undelivered item(s), and delivery of the undelivered item(s) is probable and
substantially under our control. For most of the arrangements with multiple
deliverables (hardware and services), we generally cannot establish reliable
evidence of the fair value of the undelivered items. Therefore, the majority of
revenue from these services and hardware sold in conjunction with the services
is recognized when the service is complete and we have received an acceptance
certificate. However, in some cases, we do not receive an acceptance certificate
and we estimate the completion date based upon our records.
RESIDUAL
VALUES. Residual values represent our estimated value of the equipment at the
end of the initial lease term. The residual values for direct financing and
sales-type leases are included as part of the investment in direct financing and
sales-type leases. The residual values for operating leases are included in the
leased equipment’s net book value and are reported in the investment in leases
and leased equipment—net. Our estimated residual values will vary, both in
amount and as a percentage of the original equipment cost, and depend upon
several factors, including the equipment type, manufacturer’s discount, market
conditions and the term of the lease.
We
evaluate residual values on a quarterly basis and record any required changes in
accordance with SFAS No. 13, paragraph 17.d, in which impairments of residual
value, other than temporary, are recorded in the period in which the impairment
is determined. Residual values are affected by equipment supply and demand and
by new product announcements by manufacturers.
We seek
to realize the estimated residual value at lease termination mainly through
renewal or extension of the original lease or the sale of the equipment either
to the lessee or on the secondary market. The difference between the proceeds of
a sale and the remaining estimated residual value is recorded as a gain or loss
in lease revenues when title is transferred to the lessee, or, if the equipment
is sold on the secondary market, in sales of product and services and cost of
sales, product and services when title is transferred to the buyer.
ASSUMPTIONS
RELATED TO GOODWILL. We account for our acquisitions using the purchase method
of accounting. This method requires estimates to determine the fair values of
assets and liabilities acquired including judgments to determine any acquired
intangible assets such as customer-related intangibles, as well as assessments
of the fair value of existing assets such as property and equipment. Liabilities
acquired can include balances for litigation and other contingency reserves
established prior to or at the time of acquisition, and require judgment in
ascertaining a reasonable value. Third-party valuation firms may be used to
assist in the appraisal of certain assets and liabilities, but even those
determinations are based on significant estimates provided by us, such as
forecasted revenues or profits on contract-related intangibles. Numerous factors
are typically considered in the purchase accounting assessments. Changes in
assumptions and estimates of the acquired assets and liabilities would result in
changes to the fair values, resulting in an offsetting change to the goodwill
balance associated with the business acquired.
We review
our goodwill for impairment annually, or more frequently, if indicators of
impairment exist. Goodwill has been assigned to four reporting units for
purposes of impairment testing. We believe that for the purpose SFAS No. 142, we
have four distinct reportable units: leasing, technology, software procurement
and software document management. In determining reporting units, we
consider factors such as nature of products, nature of production, type of
customer, management and the availability of separate and distinct financial
statements for each entity.
A
significant amount of judgment is involved in determining if an indicator of
impairment has occurred. Such indicators may include, among others: a
significant decline in our expected future cash flows; a sustained, significant
decline in our stock price and market capitalization; a significant adverse
change in legal factors or in the business climate; unanticipated competition;
the testing for recoverability of a significant asset group within a reporting
unit; and slower growth rates. Any adverse change in these factors could have a
significant impact on the recoverability of these assets and could have a
material impact on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
The
goodwill impairment test involves a two-step process. The first step is a
comparison of each reporting unit’s fair value to its carrying value. We
estimate fair value using the best information available, including market
information. We employ the discounted cash flow method and the guideline company
method, and compute a weighted average to determine the fair value of each
reporting unit. The discounted cash flow method uses a reporting unit’s
projection of estimated operating results and cash flows that is discounted
using a weighted-average cost of capital that reflects current market
conditions. The projection uses management’s best estimates of economic and
market conditions over the projected period including growth rates in sales,
costs, estimates of future expected changes in operating margins and cash
expenditures. Other significant estimates and assumptions include terminal value
growth rates, future estimates of capital expenditures and changes in future
working capital requirements. We validate our estimates of fair value under the
discounted cash flow method by comparing the values to fair value estimates
using the guideline company method. The guideline company method estimates fair
value by applying earnings multiples to the reporting unit’s operating
performance. The multiples are derived from publicly traded companies with
similar operating and investment characteristics as our reporting
units.
If the
carrying value of the reporting unit is higher than its fair value, there is an
indication that impairment may exist and the second step must be performed to
measure the amount of impairment loss. The amount of impairment is determined by
comparing the implied fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill to the carrying
value of the goodwill in the same manner as if the reporting unit was being
acquired in a business combination. Specifically, we would allocate the fair
value to all of the assets and liabilities of the reporting unit, including any
unrecognized intangible assets, in a hypothetical analysis that would calculate
the implied fair value of goodwill. If the implied fair value of goodwill is
less than the recorded goodwill, we would record an impairment charge for the
difference.
VENDOR
CONSIDERATION. We receive payments and credits from vendors, including
consideration pursuant to volume sales incentive programs, volume purchase
incentive programs and shared marketing expense programs. Many of these programs
extend over one or more quarter’s sales activities and are primarily
formula-based. These programs can be very complex to calculate and, in some
cases, we estimate that we will obtain our targets based upon historical
data.
Vendor
consideration received pursuant to volume sales incentive programs is recognized
as a reduction to cost of sales, product and services on the accompanying
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in accordance with
EITF Issue No. 02-16, “Accounting for Consideration
Received from a Vendor by a Customer (Including a Reseller of the Vendor’s
Products).” Vendor consideration received pursuant to volume purchase
incentive programs is allocated to inventories based on the applicable
incentives from each vendor and is recorded in cost of sales, product and
services, as the inventory is sold. Vendor consideration received pursuant to
shared marketing expense programs is recorded as a reduction of the related
selling and administrative expenses in the period the program takes place only
if the consideration represents a reimbursement of specific, incremental,
identifiable costs. Consideration that exceeds the specific, incremental,
identifiable costs is classified as a reduction of cost of sales, product and
services on the accompanying Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
We accrue
vendor consideration in accordance with the terms of the related program which
may include a certain amount of sales of qualifying products or as targets are
met or as the amounts are estimable and probable or as services are provided.
Actual vendor consideration amounts may vary based on volume or other sales
achievement levels, which could result in an increase or reduction in the
estimated amounts previously accrued, and can, at times, result in significant
earnings fluctuations on a quarterly basis.
RESERVES
FOR CREDIT LOSSES. The reserves for credit losses are maintained at a level
believed by management to be adequate to absorb potential losses inherent in our
lease and accounts receivable portfolio. Management’s determination of the
adequacy of the reserve is based on an evaluation of historical credit loss
experience, current economic conditions, volume, growth, the composition of the
lease portfolio and other relevant factors. These determinations require
considerable judgment in assessing the ultimate potential for collection of
these receivables and include giving consideration to the customer’s financial
condition and the value of the underlying collateral and funding status (i.e.
funded on a non-recourse or recourse basis).
SALES
RETURNS ALLOWANCE. The allowance for sales returns is maintained at a level
believed by management to be adequate to absorb potential sales returns from
product and services in accordance with SFAS No. 48, "Revenue Recognition when the Right of
Return Exists” (“SFAS No. 48”). Management’s determination of the
adequacy of the reserve is based on an evaluation of historical sales returns
and other relevant factors. These determinations require considerable judgment
in assessing the ultimate potential for sales returns and include consideration
of the type and volume of products and services sold.
INCOME
TAX. We make certain estimates and judgments in determining income tax expense
for financial statement purposes. These estimates and judgments occur in the
calculation of certain tax assets and liabilities, which principally arise from
differences in the timing of recognition of revenue and expense for tax and
financial statement purposes. We also must analyze income tax reserves, as well
as determine the likelihood of recoverability of deferred tax assets, and adjust
any valuation allowances accordingly. Considerations with respect to the
recoverability of deferred tax assets include the period of expiration of the
tax asset, planned use of the tax asset, and historical and projected taxable
income as well as tax liabilities for the tax jurisdiction to which the tax
asset relates. Valuation allowances are evaluated periodically and will be
subject to change in each future reporting period as a result of changes in one
or more of these factors. The calculation of our tax liabilities also involves
dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax regulations. We
recognize liabilities for uncertain income tax positions based on our estimate
of whether, and the extent to which, additional taxes will be
required.
SHARE-BASED
PAYMENT. We currently have two equity incentive plans which provide us with the
opportunity to compensate directors and selected employees with stock options,
restricted stock and restricted stock units. A stock option entitles the
recipient to purchase shares of common stock from us at the specified exercise
price. Restricted stock and restricted stock units (“RSUs”) entitle the
recipient to obtain stock or stock units, which vest over a set period of time.
RSUs are granted at no cost to the employee and employees do not need to pay an
exercise price to obtain the underlying common stock. All grants or awards made
under the plans are governed by written agreements between us and the
participants. We also have options outstanding under three previous incentive
plans, under which we no longer issue equity awards.
We
account for share-based compensation under the provisions of SFAS No.
123R. We use the Black-Scholes option-pricing model to value all
options and the straight-line method to amortize this fair value as compensation
cost over the requisite service period.
Under the
fair value method of accounting for stock-based compensation, we measure stock
option expense at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes valuation model.
This model estimates the fair value of the options based on a number of
assumptions, such as interest rates, employee exercises, the current price and
expected volatility of our common stock and expected dividends, if any. The
expected life is a significant assumption as it determines the period for which
the risk-free interest rate, volatility and dividend yield must be applied. The
expected life is the average length of time in which we expect our employees to
exercise their options. The risk-free interest rate is the five-year nominal
constant maturity Treasury rate on the date of the award. Expected stock
volatility reflects movements in our stock price over a historical period that
matches the expected life of the options. The dividend yield assumption is zero
since we have historically not paid any dividends and do not anticipate paying
any dividends in the near future.
Results
of Operations — Three months ended June 30, 2009 compared to three months
ended June 30, 2008
REVENUES
Total Revenues. We generated
total revenues during the three months ended June 30, 2009 of $152.4 million
compared to total revenues of $182.3 million during the three months June 30,
2008, a decrease of 16.4%.
Sales of product and
services. Sales of product and services decreased 15.3% to
$140.5 million during the three months ended June 30, 2009 as compared to $165.8
million during the three months June 30, 2008. The decrease in
sales is primarily attributed to the economic downturn, which generally resulted
in our customers’ tendency to postpone or cancel technology equipment
investments, particularly in the beginning of the quarter ended June 30,
2009. Sales of product and services represented 92.1% and 90.9%
of total revenue during the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. Sales of product and services as a percentage of total
revenue increased as a result of proportionately larger decreases in lease
revenue as compared to the same period in the prior fiscal year.
Gross margin. We
realized a gross margin on sales of product and services of 14.2% and 13.3%
for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Our gross
margin on sales of product and services was affected by our customers’
investment in technology equipment, the mix and volume of products and services
sold, and changes in incentives provided to us by
manufacturers. There are ongoing changes to the programs offered to
us by our manufacturers which may be affected by the current economic conditions
and thus, we may not be able to maintain the level of manufacturer incentives we
currently are receiving.
Lease revenues. Lease
revenues decreased 30.5% to $8.1 million for the three months ended June 30,
2009, as compared to $11.6 million during the three months June 30, 2008. This
decrease is primarily due to fewer leases to generate lease revenues in our
operating and direct financing lease portfolio and decreases in sales of leased
assets to lessees. From time to time, our lessees purchase leased
assets from us before and at the end of the lease term. These purchases by
lessees fluctuate primarily based upon portfolio maturity dates and amounts.
During the three months ended June 30, 2009, sales of leased assets to lessees
decreased 61.1% to $0.9 million, compared to $2.3 million during the three
months June 30, 2008.
Sales of leased equipment. We
also recognize revenue from the sale of leased equipment to non-lessee third
parties. Sales of leased equipment fluctuate from quarter to quarter,
and are a component of our risk-mitigation process, which we conduct to
diversify our portfolio by customer, equipment type, and residual value
investments. During the three months ended June 30, 2009, sales of
leased equipment increased 17.6% to $1.5 million, compared to $1.3 million
during the three months June 30, 2008. Gross margin on the sales of leased
equipment is 5.3% and 3.1%, for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The revenue and gross margin recognized on sales of
leased equipment can vary significantly depending on the nature and timing of
the sale, as well as the timing of any debt funding recognized in accordance
with SFAS No. 125, “Accounting
for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of
Liabilities,” as amended by SFAS No. 140, “Accounting for Transfers and
Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities - a replacement
of FASB Statement No. 125.”
Fee and other income. For
three months ended June 30, 2009, fee and other income decreased 33.8% to $2.4
million, compared to $3.6 million during the three months June 30, 2008. This
decrease was primarily driven by decreases in software and related consulting
revenue, agent fees from manufacturers and short-term investment income for
the three months ended June 30, 2009. Fee and other income may also include
revenues from adjunct services and fees, including broker and agent fees,
support fees, warranty reimbursements, monetary settlements arising from
disputes and litigation and interest income. Our fee and other income contain
earnings from certain transactions that are infrequent, and there is no
guarantee that future transactions of the same nature, size or profitability
will occur. Our ability to consummate such transactions, and the timing thereof,
may depend largely upon factors outside the direct control of management. The
earnings from these types of transactions in a particular period may not be
indicative of the earnings that can be expected in future
periods.
COSTS AND
EXPENSES
Cost of sales, product and services.
During the three months ended June 30, 2009, cost of sales, product and
services decreased 16.1% to $120.6 million, compared to $143.7 million during
the three months June 30, 2008. This decrease corresponded to the decrease in
sales of product and services in our technology sales business unit. Cost of
sales, products and services is also affected by incentives from manufacturers,
product mix and volume. Cost of sales, leased equipment increased 15.0% to $1.4
million during the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $1.2 million
for the three months June 30, 2008. This increase corresponds to the increase in
sales of leased equipment to non-lessee third parties in our financing business
segment.
Direct lease costs. During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, direct lease costs decreased 32.8% to $2.5
million as compared to $3.8 million during the prior fiscal year. The largest
component of direct lease costs is depreciation expense for operating lease
equipment. Our investment in operating leases decreased 33.6% to $20.3 million
at June 30, 2009 compared to $30.5 million at June 30, 2008, primarily due to
the sale of a number of lease schedules in the prior fiscal year and a reduction
in the origination of operating leases.
Professional and other fees.
During the three months ended June 30, 2009, professional and other fees
decreased 28.6% to $1.8 million, compared to $2.5 million during the three
months June 30, 2008. This decrease is primarily due to lower auditing, legal
and outside consulting fees during the three months ended June 30,
2009.
Salaries and benefits. During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, salaries and benefits expense decreased
7.9% to $17.9 million, compared to $19.5 million during the three months ended
June 30, 2008. The decrease in salaries and benefits expense
corresponds to a reduction in employees as we employed 657 people at June 30,
2009 as compared to 687 people at June 30, 2008. Where business needs
were justified, we made a gradual and non-disruptive reduction in
employees. In addition, commission expenses were reduced due to lower
sales during the three months ended June 30, 2009.
We also
provide our employees with a contributory 401(k) profit sharing plan. Employer
contribution percentages are determined by us and are discretionary each year.
The employer contributions vest over a four-year period. For the three months
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, our expenses for the plan were approximately $100
thousand and $114 thousand, respectively.
General and
administrative expenses.
During the three months
ended June 30, 2009,
general and administrative expenses decreased 7.4% to $3.5 million, as compared
to $3.8 million in the three months ended June 30,
2008. This decrease is due
to emphasis on eliminating unnecessary spending, such as travel and
entertainment, efforts to enhance productivity and a reduction in
depreciation.
Interest and financing costs.
Interest and financing costs decreased 12.1% to $1.3 million during three months
ended June 30, 2009, as compared to $1.5 million during the three months ended
June 30, 2008. This decrease is primarily driven by lower interest costs and
related expenses as a result of lower non-recourse note balances. Non-recourse
notes payable decreased 11.7% to $75.1 million at June 30, 2009 as compared to
$95.5 million at June 30, 2008.
Income taxes. Our
provision for income taxes decreased $1.1 million to $1.4 million for the three
months ended June 30, 2009 as compared to $2.6 million for the three months June
30, 2008. This decrease is due to lower earnings as compared to the prior
period. Our effective income tax rates for the three months ended June 30, 2009
and 2008 were 43.1% and 41.1%, respectively.
Net Earnings. The foregoing
resulted in net earnings of $1.9 million for the three months ended June
30, 2009, a decrease of 48.5% as compared to $3.7 million during the three
months ended June 30, 2008.
Basic and
fully diluted earnings per common share were both $0.23 for the three months
ended June 30, 2009 as compared to $0.45 and $0.43 for both basic and fully
diluted earnings per common share, respectively during the three months ended
June 30, 2008.
Basic and
diluted weighted average common shares outstanding for the three months ended
June 30, 2009 were 8,147,685 and 8,415,531 respectively. For the three
months ended June 30, 2008 the basic and diluted weighted average common shares
outstanding were 8,253,552 and 8,580,659, respectively.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Liquidity
Overview
Our
primary sources of liquidity have historically been cash and cash equivalents,
internally generated funds from operations, and borrowings, both non-recourse
and recourse. We have used those funds to meet our capital requirements, which
have historically consisted primarily of working capital for operational needs,
capital expenditures, purchases of operating lease equipment, payments of
principal and interest on indebtedness outstanding, acquisitions and the
repurchase of shares of our common stock.
Our
subsidiary ePlus
Technology, inc., part of our technology sales business segment, finances its
operations with funds generated from operations, and with a credit facility with
GECDF, which is described in more detail below. There are two components of this
facility: (1) a floor plan component; and (2) an accounts receivable component.
After a customer places a purchase order with us and we have completed our
credit check, we place an order for the equipment with one of our vendors.
Generally, most purchase orders from us to our vendors are first financed under
the floor plan component and reflected in “accounts payable—floor plan” on our
Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Payments on the floor plan
component are due on three specified dates each month, generally 40-45 days from
the invoice date. At each due date, the payment is made by the accounts
receivable component of our facility and reflected as “recourse notes payable”
on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The borrowings and
repayments under the floor plan component are reflected as “net borrowings
(repayments) on floor plan facility” in the cash flows from financing activities
section of our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash
Flows.
Most
customer payments in our technology sales business segment are received by our
lockboxes. Once payments are cleared, the monies in the lockbox accounts are
automatically transferred from our banks to GECDF as payments on the accounts
receivable facility at GECDF on a daily basis. To the extent the monies from the
lockboxes are insufficient to cover the amount due under the accounts receivable
facility, we make a cash payment to GECDF for the deficit. To the extent the
monies received from the lockbox accounts exceed the amounts due under the
accounts receivable facility, GECDF wires the excess funds to us. These payments
from the accounts receivable component to the floor plan component and
repayments from our lockboxes and repayments from our cash are reflected as “net
(borrowings) repayments on recourse lines of credit” in the cash flows from the
financing activities section of our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements
of Cash Flows. We engage in this payment structure in order to minimize our
interest expense in connection with financing the operations of our technology
sales business segment.
We
believe that cash on hand, and funds generated from operations, together with
available credit under our credit facility, will be sufficient to finance our
working capital, capital expenditures and other requirements for at least the
next twelve calendar months.
Our
ability to continue to fund our planned growth, both internally and externally,
is dependent upon our ability to generate sufficient cash flow from operations
or to obtain additional funds through equity or debt financing, or from other
sources of financing, as may be required. While at this time, we do not
anticipate the need for any additional sources of financing to fund operations,
if demand for IT products further declines, our cash flows from operations may
be substantially affected. Given the current environment within the global
financial markets, management has maintained higher cash reserves to ensure
adequate cash is available to fund our working capital requirements should the
availability to the debt and equity markets be limited.
Cash
Flows
The
following table summarizes our sources and uses of cash over the periods
indicated (in thousands):
|
|
Three
months ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
|
$ |
(18,326 |
) |
|
$ |
(11,731 |
) |
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(124
|
) |
|
|
(1,226 |
) |
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
14,168 |
|
|
|
16,371 |
|
Effect
of exchange rate changes on cash
|
|
|
(183
|
) |
|
|
11 |
|
Net
(decrease)increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
(4,465 |
) |
|
$ |
3,425 |
|
Cash Flows from Operating
Activities. Cash used in operating activities totaled $18.3
million during the three months ended June 30, 2009, compared to cash used in
operations of $11.7 million during the three months ended June 30, 2008. Cash
flows used in operations for the three months ended June 30, 2009 resulted
primarily from $15.5 million in cash used by investment in direct financing and
sales type leases—net. Our investment in direct financing and sales-type
leases—net increased $6.3 million on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets (see Note 2, “Investment in Leases and Leased Equipment—net,”)
during the three months ended June 30, 2009. The repayment of $11.3
million in principal payments by our lessees directly to our lenders for certain
leases secured by non-recourse debt had the effect of decreasing our cash
flows from operating activities. Furthermore, there were increases in
accounts receivable and inventory balances during the three months
ended June 30, 2009. The increase in inventory is primarily
attributable to several large projects that required us to stock inventory which
will ship over future quarters. This inventory has been committed to
by our customers. The increase in accounts receivable is consistent
with the increase in sales of product and services over the previous
quarter. These changes are partially offset by favorable changes in
balances of accounts payable – equipment, accounts payable – trade and
depreciation and amortization expenses.
Compared
to the three months ended June 30, 2008, net cash used in operating activities
increased $6.6 million, mostly due to a decrease in earnings, and increase in
cash used in investment in direct financing and sales-type leases—net and
inventory.
Cash Flows from Investing
Activities. Cash used in investing activities is $0.1 million for
the three months ended June 30, 2009. The proceeds from sale or
disposal of operating lease equipment are offset by cash used in purchases of
operating lease equipment and purchases of property and
equipment. Compared to the three months June 30, 2008, cash used in
investing activities decreased $1.1 million. This decrease was primarily due to
a $0.9 million decrease in purchases of operating lease equipment and no cash
used for an acquisition as compared to the three months June 30,
2008.
Cash Flows from Financing
Activities. Cash provided by financing activities is $14.2 million,
mostly driven by our borrowings on our floor plan facility. In
addition, we generated $0.7 million from proceeds from the issuance of capital
stock as a result of stock option exercises. These changes are
partially offset by our repayments of non-recourse debt of $1.2 million.
In
addition, the repayment of $11.3 million in principal payments by our lessees
directly to our lenders had the effect of decreasing our repayments of
non-recourse debt, and is not reported in our cash flows from financing
activities; however is reported on our schedule of non-cash investing and
financing activities.
Compared
to the three months June 30, 2008, cash provided by financing activities
decreased $2.2 million primarily as a result of a decrease of $3.2 million from
borrowings of non-recourse debt and floor plan facility.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Debt
financing activities provide approximately 80% to 100% of the purchase price of
the equipment we purchase for leases to our customers. Any balance of the
purchase price (our equity investment in the equipment) must generally be
financed by cash flows from our operations, the sale of the equipment leased to
third parties, or other internal means. Although we expect that the credit
quality of our leases and our residual return history will continue to allow us
to obtain such financing, no assurances can be given that such financing will be
available on acceptable terms, or at all. The financing necessary to support our
leasing activities has principally been provided by non-recourse borrowings.
Given the current market, we have been monitoring our exposure closely and
conserving our capital. Historically, we have obtained recourse and non-recourse
borrowings from banks and finance companies. We continue to be able to obtain
financing through our traditional lending sources, however pricing has increased
and has become more volatile. Non-recourse financings are loans whose repayment
is the responsibility of a specific customer, although we may make
representations and warranties to the lender regarding the specific contract or
have ongoing loan servicing obligations. Under a non-recourse loan, we borrow
from a lender an amount based on the present value of the contractually
committed lease payments under the lease at a fixed rate of interest, and the
lender secures a lien on the financed assets. When the lender is fully repaid
from the lease payment, the lien is released and all further rental or sale
proceeds are ours. We are not liable for the repayment of non-recourse loans
unless we breach our representations and warranties in the loan agreements. The
lender assumes the credit risk of each lease, and its only recourse, upon
default by the lessee, is against the lessee and the specific equipment under
lease. At June 30, 2009, our lease-related non-recourse debt portfolio decreased
11.7% to $75.1 million, as compared to $85.0 million at March 31,
2009.
Whenever
possible and desirable, we arrange for equity investment financing, which
includes selling assets, including the residual portions, to third parties and
financing the equity investment on a non-recourse basis. We generally retain
customer control and operational services, and have minimal residual risk. We
usually reserve the right to share in remarketing proceeds of the equipment on a
subordinated basis after the investor has received an agreed-to return on its
investment.
Accrued
expenses and other liabilities includes deferred expenses, deferred revenue and
amounts collected and payable, such as sales taxes and lease rental payments due
to third parties. We had $24.9 million and $29.0 million of accrued expenses and
other liabilities as of June 30, 2009 and March 31, 2009, respectively, a
decrease of 14.5%. The decrease is primarily driven by decreases in deferred
revenue and the accrual of other liabilities.
Credit Facility — Technology
Business
Our
subsidiary ePlus
Technology, inc. has a financing facility from GECDF to finance its working
capital requirements for inventories and accounts receivable. There are two
components of this facility: (1) a floor plan component; and (2) an accounts
receivable component. This facility has full recourse to ePlus Technology, inc. and is
secured by a blanket lien against all its assets, such as chattel paper,
receivables and inventory. As of June 30, 2009, the facility had an aggregate
limit of the two components of $125 million with an accounts receivable
sub-limit of $30 million. Availability under the GECDF facility may be limited
by the asset value of equipment we purchase and the aging of our accounts
receivable and may be further limited by certain covenants and terms and
conditions of the facility. These covenants include but are not limited to a
minimum total tangible net worth and subordinated debt, and maximum debt to
tangible net worth ratio of ePlus Technology, inc. We
were in compliance with these covenants as of June 30, 2009. In addition, the
facility restricts the ability of ePlus Technology, inc. to
transfer funds to its affiliates in the form of dividends, loans or advances;
however, we do not expect these restrictions to have an impact on the ability of
ePlus inc. to meet its
cash obligations. Either party may terminate with 90 days' advance
notice.
The
facility provided by GECDF requires a guaranty of up to $10.5 million by ePlus inc. The guaranty
requires ePlus inc. to
deliver its audited financial statements by certain dates. We have delivered the
annual audited financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2009 as
required. The loss of the GECDF credit facility could have a material adverse
effect on our future results as we currently rely on this facility and its
components for daily working capital and liquidity for our technology sales
business and as an operational function of our accounts payable process. In
light of the credit market condition, we have had discussions with GECDF
recently to inquire about the strategic focus of their distribution finance
unit. Pursuant to these discussions, we believe that we can continue to rely on
the availability of this credit facility. Should the GECDF credit facility no
longer be available, we believe we can increase our lines of credit with our
vendors and utilize our cash for working capital.
Floor
Plan Component
The
traditional business of ePlus
Technology, inc. as a seller of computer technology, related peripherals and
software products is in part financed through a floor plan component in which
interest expense for the first forty to forty-five days, in general, is not
charged. The floor plan liabilities are recorded as accounts payable—floor plan
on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, as they are normally
repaid within the forty- to forty-five-day time frame and represent an assigned
accounts payable originally generated with the manufacturer/distributor. If the
forty- to forty-five-day obligation is not paid timely, interest is then
assessed at stated contractual rates.
The
respective floor plan component credit limits and actual outstanding balances
for the dates indicated were as follows (in thousands):
Maximum Credit Limit at
|
|
|
Balance as of
|
|
|
Maximum Credit Limit at
|
|
|
Balance as of
|
|
$ |
125,000
|
|
|
$ |
57,182
|
|
|
$ |
125,000
|
|
|
$ |
45,127
|
|
Accounts
Receivable Component
Included
within the credit facility, ePlus Technology, inc. has an
accounts receivable component from GECDF, which has a revolving line of credit.
On the due date of the invoices financed by the floor plan component, the
invoices are paid by the accounts receivable component of the credit facility.
The balance of the accounts receivable component is then reduced by payments
from our customers into a lockbox and our available cash. The outstanding
balance under the accounts receivable component is recorded as recourse notes
payable on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. There was no
outstanding balance at June 30, 2009 or March 31, 2009.
The
respective accounts receivable component credit limits and actual outstanding
balances for the dates indicated were as follows (in thousands):
Maximum
Credit Limit at
June
30, 2009
|
|
|
Balance
as of
June
30, 2009
|
|
|
Maximum
Credit Limit at
March 31,
2009
|
|
Balance
as of
March 31,
2009
|
$ |
30,000
|
|
|
$ |
—
|
|
|
$ |
30,000
|
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Credit Facility — Leasing
Business
The
National City $35 million credit facility expired on July 10,
2009. We allowed the expiration of this credit facility pursuant to
its terms. Management believes that the expiration of this
facility will not have a material impact on our leasing business or liquidity.
We may, in the future, explore opportunities, if any, to supplement our
liquidity with an additional credit facility.
Performance
Guarantees
In the
normal course of business, we may provide certain customers with performance
guarantees, which are generally backed by surety bonds. In general, we would
only be liable for the amount of these guarantees in the event of default in the
performance of our obligations. We are in compliance with the performance
obligations under all service contracts for which there is a performance
guarantee, and we believe that any liability incurred in connection with these
guarantees would not have a material adverse effect on our Unaudited Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
As part
of our ongoing business, we do not participate in transactions that generate
relationships with unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, such as
entities often referred to as structured finance or special purpose entities,
which would have been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance
sheet arrangements as defined in Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of Regulation S-K or other
contractually narrow or limited purposes. As of June 30, 2009, we were not
involved in any unconsolidated special purpose entity
transactions.
Adequacy
of Capital Resources
The
continued implementation of our business strategy will require a significant
investment in both resources and managerial focus. In addition, we may
selectively acquire other companies that have attractive customer relationships
and skilled sales forces. We may also acquire technology companies to expand and
enhance the platform of bundled solutions to provide additional functionality
and value-added services. As a result, we may require additional financing to
fund our strategy, implementation and potential future acquisitions, which may
include additional debt and equity financing.
For the
periods presented herein, inflation has been relatively low and we believe that
inflation has not had a material effect on our results of
operations.
Potential
Fluctuations in Quarterly Operating Results
Our
future quarterly operating results and the market price of our common stock may
fluctuate. In the event our revenues or earnings for any quarter are less
than the level expected by securities analysts or the market in general, such
shortfall could have an immediate and significant adverse impact on the market
price of our common stock. Any such adverse impact could be greater if any such
shortfall occurs near the time of any material decrease in any widely followed
stock index or in the market price of the stock of one or more public equipment
leasing and financing companies, IT resellers, software competitors, major
customers or vendors of ours.
Our
quarterly results of operations are susceptible to fluctuations for a number of
reasons, including, but not limited to, reduction in IT spending, our entry into
the e-commerce market, any reduction of expected residual values related to the
equipment under our leases, the timing and mix of specific transactions, and
other factors. Quarterly operating results could also fluctuate as a result of
our sale of equipment in our lease portfolio, at the expiration of a lease term
or prior to such expiration, to a lessee or to a third party. Such sales
of equipment may have the effect of increasing revenues and net income during
the quarter in which the sale occurs, and reducing revenues and net income
otherwise expected in subsequent quarters. See Part I, Item 1A, “Risk
Factors,” in our 2009 Annual Report.
We
believe that comparisons of quarterly results of our operations are not
necessarily meaningful and that results for one quarter should not be relied
upon as an indication of future performance.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk
Although
a substantial portion of our liabilities are non-recourse, fixed-interest-rate
instruments, we utilize our lines of credit and other financing facilities which
are subject to fluctuations in short-term interest rates. These instruments,
which are denominated in U.S. dollars, were entered into for other than trading
purposes and, with the exception of amounts drawn under the GECDF facility, bear
interest at a fixed rate. Because the interest rate on these instruments is
fixed, changes in interest rates will not directly impact our cash flows.
Borrowings under the GECDF facility bear interest at a market-based variable
rate. As of June 30, 2009, the aggregate fair value of our recourse borrowings
approximated their carrying value.
During
the year ended March 31, 2003, we began transacting business in Canada. As such,
we have entered into lease contracts and non-recourse, fixed-interest-rate
financing denominated in Canadian dollars. To date, Canadian operations have
been insignificant and we believe that potential fluctuations in currency
exchange rates will not have a material effect on our financial
position.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
As of the
end of the period covered by this report, we carried out an evaluation, under
the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our
Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and our Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), of the
effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and
procedures, or “disclosure controls,” pursuant to Securities Exchange Act
(“Exchange Act”) Rule 13a-15(b). Disclosure controls are controls and procedures
designed to reasonably ensure that information required to be disclosed in our
reports filed under the Exchange Act, such as this quarterly report, is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified
in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms. Disclosure
controls include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure
that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the
Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our
CEO and CFO, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate, to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Our disclosure controls include
some, but not all, components of our internal control over financial reporting.
Based upon that evaluation, our CEO and CFO concluded that our disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of June 30, 2009.
Changes
in Internal Controls
There
have not been any changes in our internal control over financial reporting
during the quarter ended June 30, 2009, which have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
Limitations
on the Effectiveness of Controls
Our
management, including our CEO and CFO, does not expect that our disclosure
controls or our internal control over financial reporting will prevent or detect
all errors and all fraud. A control system cannot provide absolute assurance due
to its inherent limitations; it is a process that involves human diligence and
compliance and is subject to lapses in judgment and breakdowns resulting from
human failures. A control system also can be circumvented by collusion or
improper management override. Further, the design of a control system must
reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of
controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of such
limitations, disclosure controls and internal control over financial reporting
cannot prevent or detect all misstatements, whether unintentional errors or
fraud. However, these inherent limitations are known features of the financial
reporting process; therefore, it is possible to design into the process
safeguards to reduce, though not eliminate, this risk.
PART
II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Cyberco
Related Matters
We have
been involved in several matters relating to a customer named Cyberco Holdings,
Inc. (“Cyberco”). The Cyberco principals were perpetrating a scam, and at least
five principals have pled guilty to criminal conspiracy and/or related charges,
including bank fraud, mail fraud and money laundering. We have previously
disclosed our losses relating to Cyberco, and are pursuing avenues to recover
those losses. In September 2008, the Superior Court in the State of California,
County of San Diego, dismissed a claim we filed against one of our lenders, Banc
of America Leasing and Capital, LLC (“BoA”), relating to the Cyberco
transaction, and we timely filed a Notice of Appeal. We are also the defendant
in one Cyberco-related case, in which BoA filed a lawsuit against ePlus in the Circuit Court
for Fairfax County, Virginia, on November 3, 2006, seeking to enforce a guaranty
in which ePlus inc.
guaranteed ePlus
Group’s obligations to BoA relating to the Cyberco matter. ePlus Group has already paid
to BoA $4.3 million, which was awarded to BoA in a prior lawsuit regarding the
Cyberco matter. The suit against ePlus inc. seeks attorneys’
fees BoA incurred in ePlus Group’s
appeal of BoA’s suit against ePlus
Group, expenses BoA incurred in Cyberco’s bankruptcy proceedings, attorneys’
fees incurred by BoA in defending the above-referenced case in the Superior
Court in California, and all attorneys’ fees and costs BoA has incurred arising
in any way from the Cyberco matter. The trial in this suit has been stayed
pending the outcome of ePlus Group’s suit against
BoA in California. We are vigorously defending the suit against us by BoA. We
cannot predict the outcome of this suit.
In June
2007, ePlus Group, inc. and two other
Cyberco victims filed suit in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Michigan against The Huntington National Bank. The complaint alleges
counts of aiding and abetting fraud, aiding and abetting conversion, and
statutory conversion. While we believe that we have a basis for these claims to
recover certain of our losses related to the Cyberco matter, we cannot predict
whether we will be successful in our claims for damages, whether any award
ultimately received will exceed the costs incurred to pursue these matters, or
how long it will take to bring these matters to resolution.
Other
Matters
On July
31, 2009, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
dismissed the shareholder derivative action which had been filed on January 18,
2007. The action, which related to stock option practices, named ePlus inc. as nominal defendant and personally
named eight individual defendants who are directors and/or executive officers of
ePlus inc. The action alleged violations
of federal securities law, and various state law claims such as breach of
fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment, and sought
monetary damages from the individual defendants and that we take certain
corrective actions relating to option grants and corporate governance, and
attorneys’ fees.
In August
2006, the Audit Committee voluntarily contacted and advised the staff of the SEC
that it had commenced an investigation of our stock option grants since our
initial public offering in 1996 and that a restatement would be
required. This restatement was included in our Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended March 31, 2006, and was filed with the SEC on August 16,
2007. The SEC opened an informal inquiry, and subsequently notified
us by letter dated June 17, 2009 that its informal inquiry has been completed
and that the Staff does not intend to recommend any enforcement action against
us.
We may
become party to various legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of
business including preference payment claims asserted in client bankruptcy
proceedings, claims of alleged infringement of patents, trademarks, copyrights
and other intellectual property rights, claims of alleged non-compliance with
contract provisions and claims related to alleged violations of laws and
regulations. Although we do not expect that the outcome in any of these matters,
individually or collectively, will have a material adverse effect on our
financial condition or results of operations, litigation is inherently
unpredictable. Therefore, judgments could be rendered or settlements entered
that could adversely affect our results of operations or cash flows in a
particular period. We provide for costs related to contingencies when a loss is
probable and the amount is reasonably determinable.
There
have not been any material changes in the risk factors previously disclosed in
Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
March 31, 2009.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
Proceeds
The
following table provides information regarding our purchases of ePlus inc. common stock
during the three months ended June 30, 2009.
Period
|
|
Total
number of shares purchased(1)
|
|
|
Average
price paid per share
|
|
|
Total
number of shares purchased as part of publicly announced plans or
programs
|
|
|
Maximum
number (or approximate dollar value) of shares that may yet be
purchased under the plans or programs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April
1, 2009 through April 30, 2009
|
|
|
937 |
|
|
$ |
11.00 |
|
|
|
937 |
|
|
|
461,228 |
(2) |
(1)
|
All
shares acquired were in open-market
purchases.
|
(2)
|
The
share purchase authorization in place for the month ended April
30, 2009 had purchase limitations on the number of shares
(500,000). As of April 30, 2009, the remaining authorized
shares to be purchased is 461,228.
|
The
timing and expiration date of the stock repurchase authorizations as well as an
amendment to our current repurchase plan are included in Note 9, “Share
Repurchase” to our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
included elsewhere in this report.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
Not
Applicable.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security
Holders
Not
Applicable.
Item 5. Other Information
None.
Exhibit
No.
|
Exhibit
Description
|
|
|
|
Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer of ePlus inc. pursuant to
the Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and
15d-14(a).
|
|
Certification
of the Chief Financial Officer of ePlus inc. pursuant to
the Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and
15d-14(a).
|
|
Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of ePlus inc. pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350.
|
Pursuant
to the requirements 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.
|
ePlus
inc.
|
|
|
Date:
August 10, 2009
|
/s/PHILLIP G. NORTON
|
|
By:
Phillip G. Norton, Chairman of the Board,
|
|
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
Date:
August 10, 2009
|
/s/ELAINE D. MARION
|
|
By:
Elaine D. Marion
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
(Principal
Financial Officer)
|
39