|
Quotes & Info
|
| RAI > SEC Filings for RAI > Form 10-Q on 31-Jul-2009 | All Recent SEC Filings |
31-Jul-2009
Quarterly Report
RJR Tobacco
RJR Tobacco primarily conducts business in the highly competitive U.S.
cigarette market, which has a few large manufacturers and many smaller
participants. The U.S. cigarette market is a mature market in which overall
consumer demand has declined since 1981 and is expected to continue to decline.
Trade inventory adjustments may result in short-term changes in demand for RJR
Tobacco's products when wholesale and retail tobacco distributors adjust the
timing of their purchases of product to manage their inventory levels. RJR
Tobacco believes it is not appropriate for it to speculate on other external
factors that may impact the purchasing decisions of the wholesale and retail
tobacco distributors.
RJR Tobacco's brand portfolio strategy is based upon three brand categories:
growth, support and non-support. The growth brands consist of a premium brand,
CAMEL, and a value brand, PALL MALL. Although both of these brands are managed
for long-term market share and profit growth, CAMEL will continue to receive the
most significant investment support. The support brands include four premium
brands, WINSTON, KOOL, SALEM and CAPRI, and two value brands, DORAL and MISTY,
all of which receive limited marketing support. The non-support brands,
consisting of all other brands, are managed to maximize near-term profitability.
The key objectives of the portfolio strategy are to ensure the long-term market
share growth of the growth brands while managing the support brands for
long-term sustainability and profitability.
Competition is based primarily on brand positioning, including price, product
attributes and packaging, consumer loyalty, promotions, advertising and retail
presence. Cigarette brands produced by the major manufacturers generally require
competitive pricing, substantial marketing support, retail programs and other
incentives to maintain or improve market position or to introduce a new brand
style. Having expanded beyond the cigarette market as an innovative tobacco
company, RJR Tobacco offers a smokeless, spitless tobacco, known as snus, and
new smoke-free tobacco products called CAMEL Dissolvables. CAMEL Snus, launched
nationally in 2009, is pasteurized tobacco in a small pouch that provides
convenient tobacco consumption. CAMEL Dissolvables include CAMEL Orbs, Sticks
and Strips, all of which are made of finely milled tobacco and dissolve
completely in the mouth. CAMEL Orbs were launched in three lead markets during
the first quarter of 2009, and CAMEL Sticks and Strips were launched in those
lead markets at the beginning of the third quarter of 2009.
RJR Tobacco is committed to building and maintaining a portfolio of
profitable brands. RJR Tobacco's marketing programs are designed to strengthen
brand image, build brand awareness and loyalty, and switch adult smokers of
competing brands to RJR Tobacco brands. In addition to building strong brand
equity, RJR Tobacco's marketing approach utilizes a retail pricing strategy,
including discounting at retail, to defend certain brands' shares of market
against competitive pricing pressure. RJR Tobacco's competitive pricing methods
may include list price changes, discounting programs, such as retail buydowns,
periodic price reductions, dollar-off promotions, free product promotions and
consumer coupons. Retail buydowns refer to payments made to the retailer to
reduce the price that consumers pay at retail. Consumer coupons generally are
distributed by a variety of methods, including in, or on, the cigarette pack and
by direct mail. Free product promotions include offers such as "Buy 2, Get 1
free." The cost of free product promotions, including federal excise tax, is
recorded in cost of goods sold.
Conwood
Conwood offers a range of differentiated smokeless and other tobacco products
to adult consumers. The moist snuff category is divided into premium and
price-value brands. The moist snuff category has developed many of the
characteristics of the larger cigarette market, including multiple pricing tiers
with intense competition, focused marketing programs and significant product
innovation.
In contrast to the declining U.S. cigarette market, U.S. moist snuff volumes
grew over 3% in the first half of 2009 and have grown at an average rate of
approximately 6% per year over the last four years, driven by the accelerated
growth of price-value brands. The growth in the moist snuff volumes is lower in
2009 than prior years due to adjustments in trade inventories following the
federal excise tax increase and changes in competitive promotional strategies.
Profit margins on moist snuff products are generally higher than on cigarette
products. Moist snuff's growth is partially attributable to cigarette smokers
switching from cigarettes to smokeless tobacco products or using both. Within
the moist snuff category, premium brands have lost market share to price-value
brands, led by the
growth of GRIZZLY, in recent years. Leveraging RAI's total tobacco business
model, Conwood launched CAMEL Dip, a premium moist snuff, in lead markets during
the second quarter of 2009.
Conwood faces significant competition in the smokeless tobacco categories.
Similar to the cigarette market, competition is based primarily on brand
positioning and price, as well as product attributes and packaging, consumer
loyalty, promotions, advertising and retail presence. The parent company of RJR
Tobacco's largest competitor in the cigarette market, Philip Morris USA, Inc.,
completed its acquisition of Conwood's largest competitor, UST, in January 2009.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
GAAP requires estimates and assumptions to be made that affect the reported
amounts in RAI's condensed consolidated financial statements (unaudited) and
accompanying notes. Some of these estimates require difficult, subjective and/or
complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain, and as a result,
actual results could differ from those estimates. Due to the estimation
processes involved, the following summarized accounting policies and their
application are considered to be critical to understanding the business
operations, financial position and results of operations of RAI and its
subsidiaries.
Litigation
RAI discloses information concerning litigation for which an unfavorable
outcome is more than remote. RAI and its subsidiaries record their legal
expenses and other litigation costs and related administrative costs as selling,
general and administrative expenses as those costs are incurred. RAI and its
subsidiaries will record any loss related to litigation at such time as an
unfavorable outcome becomes probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated.
When the reasonable estimate is a range, the recorded loss will be the best
estimate within the range. If no amount in the range is a better estimate than
any other amount, the minimum amount of the range will be recorded.
As discussed in note 10 to condensed consolidated financial statements
(unaudited), RJR Tobacco, the Conwood companies and their affiliates, including
RAI, and indemnitees, have been named in a number of tobacco-related legal
actions, proceedings or claims seeking damages in amounts ranging into the
hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. Unfavorable judgments have
been returned in a number of tobacco-related cases and state enforcement
actions. As of July 10, 2009, RJR Tobacco had paid approximately $7 million
since January 1, 2007, related to unfavorable judgments.
RAI and its subsidiaries believe that they have valid bases for appeal of
adverse verdicts against them and have valid defenses to all actions and they
intend to defend all actions vigorously. RAI's management continues to conclude
that the loss of any particular smoking and health tobacco litigation claim
against RJR Tobacco or its affiliates or indemnitees, including B&W, or the loss
of any particular claim concerning the use of smokeless tobacco against the
Conwood companies, when viewed on an individual basis, is not probable or
estimable. As of June 30, 2009, RJR Tobacco had $2 million accrued for
non-smoking and health litigation, and RJR, including its subsidiary RJR
Tobacco, had liabilities totaling $94 million that were recorded in 1999 in
connection with certain non-smoking indemnification claims asserted by JTI
relating to certain activities of Northern Brands and related litigation.
Litigation is subject to many uncertainties, and it is possible that some of
the tobacco-related legal actions, proceedings or claims could ultimately be
decided against RJR Tobacco, the Conwood companies or their affiliates,
including RAI, and indemnitees. Any unfavorable outcome of such actions could
have a material adverse effect on the consolidated results of operations, cash
flows or financial position of RAI or its subsidiaries. For further discussion
of the litigation and legal proceedings pending against RAI or its affiliates or
indemnitees, see note 10 to condensed consolidated financial statements
(unaudited).
Settlement Agreements
RJR Tobacco, Santa Fe and Lane are participants in the MSA and RJR Tobacco is
a participant in the other State Settlement Agreements related to governmental
health-care cost recovery actions. Their obligations and the related expense
charges under the State Settlement Agreements are subject to adjustments based
upon, among other things,
the volume of cigarettes sold by the operating subsidiaries, their relative
market share and inflation. Since relative market share is based on cigarette
shipments, the best estimate of the allocation of charges to RJR Tobacco under
these agreements is recorded in cost of products sold as the products are
shipped. Adjustments to these estimates are recorded in the period that the
change becomes probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. The Conwood
companies are not participants in the State Settlement Agreements. For more
information related to historical and expected settlement expenses and payments
under the State Settlement Agreements, see "- Litigation Affecting the Cigarette
Industry- Health-Care Cost Recovery Cases - State Settlement Agreements" and "-
State Settlement Agreements - Enforcement and Validity" in note 10 to condensed
consolidated financial statements (unaudited).
Intangible Assets
Intangible assets include goodwill, trademarks and other intangible assets
and are accounted for under SFAS No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets." The determination of fair value involves considerable estimates and
judgment. In particular, the fair value of a reporting unit involves, among
other things, developing forecasts of future cash flows, determining an
appropriate discount rate, and when goodwill impairment is implied, determining
the fair value of individual assets and liabilities, including unrecorded
intangibles. Although RAI believes it has based its impairment testing and
impairment charges on reasonable estimates and assumptions, the use of different
estimates and assumptions could result in materially different results.
Generally, if the current competitive or regulatory environment worsens or RAI's
operating companies' strategic initiatives adversely affect their financial
performance, the fair value of goodwill, trademarks and other intangible assets
could be impaired in future periods. See note 3 to condensed consolidated
financial statements (unaudited) for a discussion of the impairment charge in
connection with RAI's ongoing application of SFAS No. 142.
Fair Value Measurement
RAI determines fair value of assets and liabilities under SFAS No. 157, which
provides a definition of fair value, establishes a fair value hierarchy that
distinguishes between market participant assumptions developed based on market
data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity, and the
reporting entity's own assumptions about market participant assumptions
developed based on the best information available in the circumstances and
expands disclosure about fair value measurements.
FSP No. FAS 157-3, "Determining the Fair Value of a Financial Asset When the
Market for That Asset Is Not Active," clarifies the application of SFAS No. 157
in a market that is not active and provides an example to illustrate key
considerations in determining the fair value of a financial asset when the
market for that financial asset is not active.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell
an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants at the measurement date, essentially an exit price.
The levels of the fair value hierarchy established by SFAS No. 157 are:
Level 1: inputs are quoted prices, unadjusted, in active markets for
identical assets or liabilities that the reporting entity has the ability to
access at the measurement date.
Level 2: inputs are other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are
observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. A Level 2
input must be observable for substantially the full term of the asset or
liability.
Level 3: inputs are unobservable and reflect the reporting entity's own
assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing
the asset or liability.
Investments
As of June 30, 2009, RAI held investments primarily in money market funds,
auction rate securities and a mortgage-backed security. Certain money market
funds are classified as short-term investments due to the liquidity restrictions
by the fund managers preventing immediate withdrawal. Adverse changes in
financial markets caused certain auction rate securities and the mortgage-backed
security to revalue lower than carrying value and become
less liquid. Auction rate securities and the mortgage-backed security will not
become liquid until a successful auction occurs or a buyer is found. These
investments will be evaluated on a quarterly basis to determine if it is
probable that RAI will realize some portion of the unrealized loss.
RAI reviews impairments associated with the above in accordance with SFAS
No. 115, FSP No. FAS 115-1 and FAS 124-1, FSP No. EITF 99-20-1 and FSP No. 115-2
and FAS 124-2 to determine the classification of the impairment as temporary or
other-than-temporary. For additional information relating to these investments,
see note 6 to condensed consolidated financial statements (unaudited).
Income Taxes
Tax law requires certain items to be excluded or included in taxable income
at different times than is required for book reporting purposes under SFAS
No. 109, "Accounting for Income Taxes." These differences may be permanent or
temporary in nature. FASB Interpretation No. 48, "Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes," clarifies SFAS No. 109 by providing guidance for consistent
reporting of uncertain income tax positions recognized in a company's financial
statements.
RAI determines its annual effective income tax rate based on forecasted
pre-tax book income and forecasted permanent book and tax differences. The rate
is established at the beginning of the year and is evaluated on a quarterly
basis. Any changes to the forecasted information may cause the effective rate to
be adjusted. Additional tax, interest and penalties associated with uncertain
tax positions are recognized in tax expense on a quarterly basis.
To the extent that any book and tax differences are temporary in nature, that
is, the book realization will occur in a different period than the tax
realization, a deferred tax asset or liability is established as required under
SFAS No. 109. To the extent that a deferred tax asset is created, management
evaluates RAI's ability to realize this asset. Management currently believes it
is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets recorded in RAI's
consolidated balance sheets will be realized. To the extent a deferred tax
liability is established under SFAS No. 109, it is recorded, tracked and, once
it becomes currently due and payable, paid to the taxing authorities.
The financial statements reflect management's best estimate of RAI's current
and deferred tax liabilities and assets. Future events, including but not
limited to, additional resolutions with taxing authorities could have an impact
on RAI's current estimate of tax liabilities, realization of tax assets and upon
RAI's effective income tax rate.
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements and Recently Issued Accounting
Pronouncements
For additional information relating to recently adopted accounting
pronouncements and recently issued accounting pronouncements, see note 1 to
condensed consolidated financial statements (unaudited).
Results of Operations
For the Three Months Ended For the Six Months Ended
June 30, June 30,
2009 2008 % Change 2009 2008 % Change
Net sales:(1)
RJR Tobacco $ 1,975 $ 2,057 (4.0 )% $ 3,646 $ 3,864 (5.6 )%
Conwood 169 188 (10.1 )% 335 355 (5.6 )%
All other 106 94 12.8 % 190 177 7.3 %
Net sales 2,250 2,339 (3.8 )% 4,171 4,396 (5.1 )%
Cost of products sold(1)(2) 1,201 1,305 (8.0 )% 2,199 2,469 (10.9 )%
Selling, general and administrative expenses 393 391 0.5 % 758 773 (1.9 )%
Amortization expense 7 6 16.7 % 15 11 36.4 %
|
For the Three Months Ended For the Six Months Ended
June 30, June 30,
2009 2008 % Change 2009 2008 % Change
Trademark impairment
charges $ - $ - NM (3) $ 453 $ - NM (3)
Operating income:
RJR Tobacco 556 538 3.3 % 638 964 (33.8 )%
Conwood 92 96 (4.2 )% 100 177 (43.5 )%
All other 25 26 (3.8 )% 49 51 (3.9 )%
Corporate expense (24 ) (23 ) 4.3 % (41 ) (49 ) (16.3 )%
Operating income $ 649 $ 637 1.9 % $ 746 $ 1,143 (34.7 )%
|
(1) Excludes excise taxes of:
2009 2008 2009 2008
RJR Tobacco $ 1,131 $ 447 $ 1,493 $ 838
Conwood 45 5 50 10
All other 71 48 114 89
$ 1,247 $ 500 $ 1,657 $ 937
|
(2) See below for further information related to the State Settlement Agreements and federal tobacco buyout expense included in cost of products sold.
(3) Percentage change not meaningful.
RJR Tobacco
Net Sales
Domestic shipment volume, in billions of units for RJR Tobacco and the
industry, were as follows(1):
For the Three Months Ended For the Six Months Ended
June 30, June 30,
2009 2008 % Change 2009 2008 % Change
Growth brands:
CAMEL excluding non-filter 5.7 6.1 (7.8 )% 10.7 11.4 (6.5 )%
PALL MALL 4.5 2.2 105.0 % 6.4 3.8 68.5 %
10.2 8.4 22.1 % 17.1 15.2 12.3 %
Support brands 10.1 12.6 (19.5 )% 19.8 23.9 (16.9 )%
Non-support brands 2.1 2.9 (28.5 )% 4.2 5.6 (25.9 )%
Total domestic 22.4 23.9 (6.0 )% 41.1 44.7 (8.1 )%
Total premium 12.9 15.0 (13.6 )% 24.6 28.1 (12.5 )%
Total value 9.5 8.9 6.7 % 16.5 16.6 (0.6 )%
Premium/total mix 57.6 % 62.6 % 59.9 % 62.9 %
Industry(2):
Premium 60.6 65.3 (7.1 )% 112.1 124.0 (9.6 )%
Value 25.3 24.4 3.7 % 45.9 46.0 (0.3 )%
Total domestic 86.0 89.7 (4.1 )% 157.9 170.1 (7.1 )%
Premium/total mix 70.5 % 72.8 % 71.0 % 72.9 %
|
(1) Amounts presented in this table are rounded on an individual basis and, accordingly, may not sum on an aggregate basis. Percentages are calculated on unrounded numbers.
(2) Based on information from Management Science Associates, Inc., referred to as MSAi.
RJR Tobacco's net sales are dependent upon its cigarette shipment volume in a
declining market, premium versus value-brand mix and list pricing, offset by
promotional spending, trade incentives and federal excise taxes. RJR Tobacco
believes the federal excise tax increase, effective April 1, 2009, has had, and
will continue to have, a significant and adverse impact on cigarette sales
volume. RJR Tobacco also believes its consumers are more price-sensitive than
consumers of competing brands and, therefore, are more negatively affected by an
increase in the federal excise tax and by the current adverse economic
environment.
RJR Tobacco's net sales for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, decreased
$82 million, or 4.0%, from the prior-year quarter, driven by $106 million
attributable to lower cigarette volume. Net sales for the six months ended
June 30, 2009, decreased $218 million, or 5.6%, from the prior-year quarter,
. . .
|
|