value1008
9 years ago
Here's the conf call transcript from S.Alpha... sorry for the general lack of proper spacing in cutting & pasting here [i put in just a few paragraph spaces]. You can read the original transcript at S.A.
Stuart Rose wasn't very bullish on guidance at all for this present qtr... I'm surprised the shareprice held up so strongly, especially given that most of the reported 2.16 EPS was income from the one-time sale of the Patriot plant. I think the fact that oilprice had a big jump today helped juice things... I wonder how many people just saw the "2.16 EPS" figure and bought without delving into the fine print. If so, this could come crashing back down into the $40s....
REX American Resources' (REX) CEO Zafar Rizvi on Q2 2015 Results - Earnings Call Transcript
REX American Resources Corporation (NYSE:REX)
Q2 2015 Results Earnings Conference Call
August 27, 2015 11:00 AM ET
Executives
Doug Bruggeman - Chief Financial Officer
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
Zafar Rizvi - Chief Executive Officer
Analysts
Jeremy Hellman - Singular Research
Katja Jancic - Sidoti & Company
David Koenig - Candlewood Investment Group
Operator
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to the REX American Resources Second Quarter Conference Call. During the presentation, all participants will be in a listen-only mode. Afterwards, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions]
I would now like to turn the conference over to Doug Bruggeman, Chief Financial Officer. Please go ahead, sir.
Doug Bruggeman - Chief Financial Officer
Good morning and thank you for joining REX American Resources fiscal 2015 second quarter conference call. We’ll get to our presentation and comments momentarily, as well as your Q&A session, but first I’ll review the Safe Harbor disclosure. In addition to historical facts or statements of current conditions, today’s conference call contains forward-looking statements […]
I have joining me on the call today Stuart Rose, Executive Chairman of the Board and Zafar Rizvi, Chief Executive Officer. I’ll first review our financial performance and then turn the call over to Stuart for his commentary.
REX is pleased to report another strong earnings report for its fiscal 2015 second quarter relative to industry dynamics. Sales for the quarter did decline approximately 24% for the quarter, 29% for the first half of the year, primarily reflecting lower ethanol and DDG pricing. Sales for the quarter were based upon 57.9 million gallons this year versus 54.5 million gallons of ethanol in the prior year.
Gross profit declined from $38.8 million to $18.3 million for the second quarter as the crush spread was approximately $0.22 in the current year versus approximately $0.61 in the prior year. Gross profit for the first half of fiscal 2015 was $27.4 million versus $75.5 million in the prior year and the crush spread was approximately $0.18 this year versus approximately $0.60 last year.
SG&A increased in the current year second quarter, primarily due to higher percentage of incentive compensation caps being hit in the first quarter of last year, resulting in more of that compensation being recognized in this year’s second quarter. We recognized a pretax gain of $10.4 million from the sale of the Patriot plant, which includes $4.4 million of estimated receivables from escrowed funds. The final determination of escrowed payment is expected by the end of 2016. Equity method income was $5.1 million versus $7.2 million for the second quarter and $6.5 million versus $15.5 million for the first half of the fiscal year. We stopped recognizing equity method income on the Patriot plant as of May 31, 2015 upon the closing of that sale.
Our net income for the quarter was $16.4 million versus $21.9 million in the prior year and $20.3 million for the first half of the year versus $43.6 million in the prior year. Our earnings per share for the quarter were $2.16 versus $2.68 last year and for the first half of the year $2.62 versus $5.35 in the prior year. Earnings per share for the second quarter did begin to benefit from our recent aggressive share repurchase program.
I’ll now turn the call over to Stuart for his commentary.
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
Thank you, Doug. On the positive side, margins improved versus the first quarter. The rise was primarily due to a larger crush spread which had to do with a little bit higher price for the ethanol that we saw during the first quarter and higher DDG pricing than the first quarter. The sale of the interest in Patriot, of course increased their earnings per share; they gained on that and also decline in natural gas prices helped us.
DDG prices during the second quarter actually were above the -- on a price per ton basis above the price of corn and it benefitted from demand from China. Again, we proved as we do almost every quarter that we have the -- among the best plants in the industry, we have Fagen/ICM technology, good rail and good corn access. And it continues to allow us to outperform what other -- what a typical plant in our industry does.
Going forward, our earnings per share for the next quarter are tracking slightly above our first quarter and below our second quarter. Crush margins are being hurt by oil prices. They continue to decline. And that puts a cap on or at least does not help the price that we can sell our ethanol for and it’s something that could be an issue as -- if oil prices continue to decline and wholesale gasoline becomes cheaper than ethanol, it’s something we worry about.
We also have the political season opponents [ph] through Iowa; most Republicans aren’t adamantly against ethanol, they don’t necessarily or in most cases don’t support ethanol but aren’t adamantly against this. So, we don’t expect any legislation to come out, certainly not before Iowa and certainly not while the Democrats are in power. Hillary Clinton seems to support ethanol. So, we’ll see what happens there.
On the DDG side, China demand, China as everyone knows is not the market it was earlier in the year and their -- demand for DDG from China seems to be falling off. That could be an issue.
On the flip side, we have a lot of cash. We actually, even with the buybacks had a little bit more cash at the end of the quarter due to earnings and the sale of the Patriot plant than we had during the beginning of the quarter. We as of this date, have completed two 500,000 share buybacks and have authorized another 500,000 share buyback. Our stock is selling significantly below the asset replacement value. And we think this is -- we believe this is a good use of corporate capital. We continue to look for other opportunities in alternative energy.
We are the only one that we have found today that’s heavy oil steaming. We hope to have a permit from Californian test [ph] this fiscal year. Let’s see what happens. Even testing at today’s oil prices, they won’t be in the imminent -- it won’t be something that brings imminent returns to our shareholders and we’re going very-very slow on that.
We’ve decided not to spend our capital on a new [ethanol] plant and instead are working to gradually increase the existing capacity of our current plants. We believe we can do this at a much lower cost per gallon basis. And it’s an industry we know; these are plants we know and we feel very comfortable trying to increase the capacity of our current plants.
In terms of the major use of our capital, our board continues to believe there’s nothing better than buying in shares. Each time we buy in shares, as we continue to make money, we increase our earnings per share. And it’s our way of giving back our earnings to our shareholders.
In conclusion, we have the best plants; in our opinion, we have great locations; technology is very, very good; good rail; and most importantly, we have great people. They’ve allowed us to -- all these things together have allowed us to continue to outperform the industry in a time that at least relative to oil prices, a very, very difficult time.
I’ll leave now podium open to questions.
Question-and-Answer Session
Operator
[Operator Instructions] So, our first question comes from the line of Jeremy Hellman with Singular Research. Please proceed with your question.
Jeremy Hellman - Singular Research
Mainly wanted to touch on one of your comments there towards the end Stuart in terms of the decision to discontinue pursuit of a new build and was curious for some more color on that. And then also if that has any implications for potential purchase of existing plants that the market for those has changed favorably.
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
I’d add to your first question. When we first pursued a new build, margins were significantly higher than they are today. We also in the meantime have received some approvals, not all the approvals we need but some approvals. And we think we’re on track to increase the size of our existing plants. So, it’s as simple as one is significantly less, significantly less risk to our shareholders. And to be honest, buying in shares at current prices is a much more attractive option to our board and to me than building a brand new plant from scratch and all the risk involved in doing that. We can increase our earnings per share using the same capital buying in shares and expanding our plants. So, we chose at this time to go that route.
In terms of opportunities, I -- we have not seen any new opportunities. Most people in the industry don’t have a lot of debt; there’s no urgency to sell plants -- sell good plants. We wouldn’t buy bad plants. No urgency to sell good plants. So, we have not seen anything on that front to-date. Nothing has been presented to us new that would be of interest. That doesn’t mean that won’t happen in the future but to-date nothing, we have nothing to report on that.
Jeremy Hellman - Singular Research
And then just to follow up on the share buyback efforts. Do you have -- trying to think of the best way to frame the question; is there kind of a point where you say yourself that the resulting illiquidity in the marketplace becomes a concern? Do you kind of have a kind of target share count level or anything like that in mind or is it more just kind of opportunistic as the days…
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
It’s absolutely opportunistic and it’s funny that you say that. A few years ago when our share count was much higher, our stock was trading maybe 20,000-25,000 shares a day -- at a much, much lower price today it trades on 150,000 today and there’s a lot of liquidity out there. We’re cleaning some of it up but there’s a lot of liquidity. It has not been an issue. Even though we have less shares, it’s actually much bigger float than there was few years ago. And to answer your question directly, there’s no limit. If we look at the stock as a value and we have the cash and it’s a dip, my opinion is -- and almost always inevitably when there’s a dip like that there’s float. My opinion is it helps the shareholder, the existing shareholders to buy their shares in; it helps the people that want to sell their shares. In all ways, it’s a good thing for shareholders and we do not limit ourselves by float.
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Katja Jancic with Sidoti & Company. Please proceed with your question.
Katja Jancic - Sidoti & Company
Stuart, you mentioned upgrading your facilities to increase the capacity. Can you talk a little bit more about that? How much you can increase, how much that will cost?
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
Zafar, do you want to answer that question?
Zafar Rizvi - Chief Executive Officer
Yes. We plan to spend somewhere between $10 million to $20 million over next 12 months. We think we can increase our capacity somewhere 10% to 15% of capacity. So, we’re expecting that we will be able to produce close to 135 million gallon in each location.
Doug Bruggeman - Chief Financial Officer
When Zafar speaking about each location, we’re talking about consolidated.
Katja Jancic - Sidoti & Company
So, this will be -- the $10 million to $20 million will be in the next 12 months, correct?
Zafar Rizvi - Chief Executive Officer
That’s correct.
Katja Jancic - Sidoti & Company
Now just going -- you are able to generate very strong free cash flow even during the tough times. You have a lot of cash on the balance sheet. What’s really beyond just share buybacks? Are there any other plans beyond…?
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
We’re always looking at other alternative energy things to look at but with oil prices where they are, it’s hard to find anything that’s great today. We have our heavy oil business that we’ve been trying to get permitted in California and hope to have that permitted, and we have a made little progress on that; hope to have that permitted. But again, that won’t be a money maker.
The best thing that we can see, if the industry stays tough, there might be that opportunity to buy an existing plant at a price that we consider reasonable. If that happens, we have the money to do it; we have the liquidity to do it. Other than that, expanding our plants and buying in shares really gives you the same effect. We took basically money that we received on selling the minority interest in Patriot and reinvested it in REX. And certainly as we’re making money, we expect it to increase our earnings per share forever basic one.
Katja Jancic - Sidoti & Company
Is there a chance you could create an MLP?
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
I have seen other people create MLPs and I would say -- to answer your question, I think the buyback is our way of returning. I’m not saying it’s good or bad in MLP but buyback in my mind is a best way to return capital to shareholders when you are a small company. You can’t do 50 different things and this is -- you are better off focusing on one thing whether it’s paying dividends, buyback or doing an MLP whatever. We look at this as the best. The board has historically looked at this as a best way of spending our excess capital. And it may change in the future, but that’s where we are today.
Operator
[Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from the line of Clayton Vernon [ph] with Vector Capital. Please proceed.
Unidentified Analyst
Mr. Rose, going forward, where can we expect the SG&A expenses on a quarterly basis today? They were up $2 million this quarter as you explained, hitting some performance bounces. But on a consolidated basis, the company is a bit smaller than it was last quarter. Can we expect these to be under $4 million on a quarterly basis?
Doug Bruggeman - Chief Financial Officer
They should be relatively stable throughout the year. The only thing that -- only variability you really get in that of any significance is when we book that incentive compensation. So, it should be relatively consistent subject to company profitability.
Unidentified Analyst
And second question, you mentioned excellent rail Mr. Rose. But by one metric, the basis the price you’re receiving for the ethanol versus the swaps that are created on the stream, that is continued to drift down a bit. Are you facing increased costs from the rail or any other logistical difficulties or does this simply reflect some form of a premium that’s built into the stream that’s available to producers as yourself?
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
Zafar, do you want to answer that?
Zafar Rizvi - Chief Executive Officer
I think it certainly depends on also which location we are shipping from. It is the transportation involved. So, that’s the reason -- if we’re shipping from new NuGen plant, certainly there is a transportation involved. And if we’re shipping from One Earth Energy, at Illinois, transportation is very cheap. That’s the reason it reflects that way.
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of David Koenig with Candlewood Investment Group. Please proceed.
David Koenig - Candlewood Investment Group
I had a quick question. You guys have sold an asset at a $1.65 on a per gallon basis. You guys are trading significantly below that, which I see is why you guys are doing the share buybacks. But where would you be interested in acquiring assets, what sort of context? And secondly, looking at some of your competitors, they seem to be trading at a significant discount to your stock. So, is your stock the right thing to be buying or is it some of the competitors?
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
We feel we have by far the -- relative to the public competitors, our plants are -- we consider our plants premium, we consider ourselves to be best of breed in ethanol and are -- depends on what metric you use on an earnings per share basis. I don’t think we are -- I think we’re probably -- I don’t think we’re -- I don’t know their stocks are well on that closely but I believe historically and probably now on an earnings per share basis, we sell at a lower -- we’re the best company and I believe our earnings per share basis is probably lower than theirs. So, I don’t know what metric maybe on a per gallon basis, we sell at a little higher price. But again we showed we have really, really good gallons and our earnings show that we have great plants.
The question on what price we would pay for a plant. Historically, we’ve always been bargain hunters in this industry; it’s tendency to also react and on the downside. So, the opportunity comes up. I can’t tell you what price the board would authorize paying for a plant. I just don’t know. But again, we felt on the selling side that we received a very good price for a minority interest; what price we would pay on the buying side, I can’t tell you today.
David Koenig - Candlewood Investment Group
And do you always look at things on earnings per share basis? Because we tend to look at things just on a per gallon basis of what you’re paying for the plants and that’s the discount that I am looking at…
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
Yes, and we, because we -- so if I were other people who had a lot of gallons not making much money, I would look it as a per gallon basis but since our plants make really -- relative to the industry do very well and always have done very well, we look at it on an earnings per share basis. I think most financial people in the general financial community probably look at it on an earnings per share basis whereas analysts dig a little deeper, use per gallon as one of their metrics, certainly not their only metric, but one of their metric. Another thing that we look at is book value per share. And like you mentioned earlier, we were able to buy our shares at significantly below replacement value for these plants and have done so.
David Koenig - Candlewood Investment Group
And on earnings per share basis and this is the final question… on earnings per share basis, you’re including the gain on sale of investment. Obviously that’s not going to be recurring sort of business, so there is no sort of multiple applied to it. So, doesn’t it seem a little bit high right with a 2.16 per share because you’re including that?
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
Again that’s up for you guys to decide. So, we put the numbers on the table. And if you want to be in the ethanol industry, we strongly feel we have a great company, great plants, great people and have done very, very well relative to the industry consistently.
David Koenig - Candlewood Investment Group
I agree with you completely. I see some of the public comps out there trading at $0.70 per gallon. So, it’s attractive at these levels. Thank you for the time.
Operator
There are no further questions at this time. I’ll turn the call back over to you. Please continue with your presentation or closing remarks.
Stuart Rose - Executive Chairman
We’d like to thank everyone for their support and we appreciate it very much. And thank you for listening. Bye.
value1008
9 years ago
REX earnings report out this a.m.-- note that EPS was juiced up by sale of Patriot plant. There has been an amazing amount of share buybacks going on; as of this morning, they report only 6.9M shares after almost 1million shares bought in just the past 4 months (the share-count was 8.2M a year ago). Moreover, the board authorized a new capacity to buy up to 500,000 more shares.
http://seekingalpha.com/pr/14512256-rex-american-resources-reports-second-quarter-diluted-eps-of-2_16
REX American Resources Reports Second Quarter Diluted EPS of $2.16
Thu August 27, 2015 7:01 AM|Business Wire | About: REX
-Announces New 500,000 Share Repurchase Program-
DAYTON, Ohio--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- REX American Resources Corporation (REX) today reported financial results for its fiscal 2015 second quarter (Q2 15) ended July 31, 2015. REX management will host a conference call and webcast today at 11:00 a.m. ET to review the results.
Conference Call:
(212) 231-2930
Webcast / Replay URL:
www.rexamerican.com/Corp/Page4.aspx
The webcast will be available for replay for 30 days
REX American Resources Q2 15 results principally reflect its interests in seven ethanol production facilities. The operations of One Earth Energy, LLC (One Earth) and NuGen Energy, LLC (NuGen) are consolidated, while those of its five other plants are reported as equity in income of unconsolidated ethanol affiliates. During the fiscal 2015 second quarter the Company recorded a $10.4 million pre-tax gain related to the June sale of its 26.6% interest in Patriot Holdings, LLC (Patriot). As such, equity in income of unconsolidated ethanol affiliates for the quarter ended July 31, 2015 includes two months contribution from REXs prior interest in Patriot.
REXs Q2 15 net sales and revenue totaled $113.5 million, compared with $150.2 million in Q2 14, principally reflecting reduced ethanol and distillers grains pricing. As a result of the tightening of ethanol crush spread margins and decline in distiller grains pricing, the Companys Q2 15 gross profit was $18.3 million, compared with $38.8 million in the prior year period. Again reflecting the current operating environment, Q2 15 equity in income of unconsolidated ethanol affiliates was $5.1 million, compared with $7.2 million in Q2 14. As a result, income from continuing operations before income taxes and non-controlling interests in Q2 15 were $27.4 million, compared with $40.7 million in Q2 14.
Net income attributable to REX shareholders in Q2 15 was $16.4 million, compared with $21.9 million in Q2 14, while Q2 15 diluted net income per share attributable to REX common shareholders was $2.16 per share, compared to $2.68 per share in Q2 14. Per share results in Q2 15 and Q2 14 are based on 7,580,000 and 8,182,000 diluted weighted average shares outstanding, respectively.
REXs Executive Chairman of the Board, Stuart Rose, commented, The second quarter operating environment improved from earlier in the year, yet remained challenging as we continued to experience lower production margins compared to last year. REX again leveraged the strategic location of our plants and our overall business model to continue to generate profitable operating results.
Additionally, in June we received approximately $45 million representing the cash consideration related to our interest in the Patriot plant following its sale. We allocated after-tax proceeds and cash to repurchase approximately 998,000 REX shares in fiscal 2015 to date.
During the Companys fiscal second quarter, REX purchased 764,339 shares of its common stock (at an average price of $60.43 per share). Subsequent to the end of the fiscal second quarter, the Company repurchased an additional 233,243 shares (at an average price of $49.78 per share), thus completing the previously announced share repurchase program. Reflecting all purchases to date, REX presently has 6,905,193 shares of common stock outstanding.
In addition, on August 26, 2015, REXs Board of Directors approved a new share repurchase plan providing the Company with the authority to repurchase up to 500,000 shares of its common stock. Share repurchases will be made from time to time in open market or private transactions at prevailing market prices, and all shares purchased will be held in the Companys treasury for possible future use.
Balance Sheet
At July 31, 2015, REX had cash and cash equivalents of $138.1 million, $68.5 million of which was at the parent company and $69.6 million of which was at its consolidated ethanol production facilities. This compares with cash and cash equivalents of $137.7 million at January 31, 2015, $82.9 million of which was at the parent company and $54.8 million of which was at its consolidated ethanol production facilities.
The following table summarizes select data related to the Companys consolidated alternative energy interests:
Three Months
Ended
Six Months
Ended
July 31, July 31,
2015
2014
2015
2014
Average selling price per gallon of ethanol
$
1.50
$
2.18
$
1.46
$
2.16
Average selling price per ton of dried distillers grains
$
169.31
$
192.77
$
156.16
$
201.57
Average selling price per pound of non-food grade corn oil
$
0.28
$
0.36
$
0.28
$
0.34
Average selling price per ton of modified distillers grains
$
73.95
$
68.49
$
78.48
$
81.88
Average cost per bushel of grain $ 3.64 $ 4.47 $ 3.65 $ 4.41
Average cost of natural gas (per mmbtu)
$
3.42
$
5.14
$
4.13
$
7.27
Supplemental Data Related to REXs Alternative Energy Interests:
REX American Resources Corporation
Ethanol Ownership Interests/Effective Annual Gallons Shipped as of July 31, 2015
(gallons in millions)
Entity
Trailing
Twelve
Months
Gallons
Shipped
Current
REX
Ownership
Interest
REXs Current Effective
Ownership of Trailing
Twelve Month Gallons
Shipped
One Earth Energy, LLC
(Gibson City, IL)
112.7 74.6% 84.1
NuGen Energy, LLC
(Marion, SD)
117.3 99.5% 116.7
Big River Resources West Burlington, LLC
(West Burlington, IA)
105.8 9.7% 10.3
Big River Resources Galva, LLC
(Galva, IL)
115.9 9.7% 11.2
Big River United Energy, LLC
(Dyersville, IA)
123.8 4.9% 6.1
Big River Resources Boyceville, LLC
(Boyceville, WI)
57.7 9.7% 5.6
Total 633.2 n/a 234.0
About REX American Resources Corporation
REX American Resources has interests in six ethanol production facilities, which in aggregate shipped approximately 633 million gallons of ethanol over the twelve month period ended July 31, 2015. REXs effective ownership of the trailing twelve month gallons shipped (for the twelve months ended July 31, 2015) by the ethanol production facilities in which it currently has ownership interests was approximately 234 million gallons. Further information about REX is available at www.rexamerican.com.
This news announcement contains or may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements can be identified by use of forward-looking terminology such as may, expect, believe, estimate, anticipate or continue or the negative thereof or other variations thereon or comparable terminology. Readers are cautioned that there are risks and uncertainties that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those referred to in such forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include the risk factors set forth from time to time in the Companys filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and include among other things: the impact of legislative changes, the price volatility and availability of corn, dried and modified distillers grains, ethanol, corn oil, gasoline and natural gas, ethanol plants operating efficiently and according to forecasts and projections, changes in the national or regional economies, weather, transportation delays, the effects of terrorism or acts of war, changes in real estate market conditions and the impact of Internal Revenue Service audits. The Company does not intend to update publicly any forward-looking statements except as required by law.
REX AMERICAN RESOURCES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
Unaudited
Three Months
Ended
Six Months
Ended
July 31,
July 31,
2015
2014
2015
2014
Net sales and revenue $ 113,480 $ 150,231 $ 218,677 $ 306,156
Cost of sales 95,204 111,391 191,274 230,681
Gross profit 18,276 38,840 27,403 75,475
Selling, general and administrative expenses (6,456 ) (4,839 ) (10,909 ) (11,010 )
Gain on sale of investment 10,385 - 10,385 -
Equity in income of unconsolidated ethanol affiliates 5,063 7,245 6,543 15,542
Gain on disposal of property and equipment, net 12 - 495 -
Interest and other income 107 87 325 135
Interest expense - (591 ) - (1,283 )
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and non-controlling interests
27,387
40,742
34,242
78,859
Provision for income taxes (8,676 ) (14,017 ) (11,092 ) (27,937 )
Income from continuing operations including non-controlling interests
18,711
26,725
23,150
50,922
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax - (12 ) - (9 )
Gain on disposal of discontinued operations, net of tax
-
5
- 5
Net income including non-controlling interests 18,711 26,718 23,150 50,918
Net income attributable to non-controlling interests (2,344 ) (4,811 ) (2,856 ) (7,269 )
Net income attributable to REX common shareholders $ 16,367 $ 21,907 $ 20,294 $ 43,649
Weighted average shares outstanding basic 7,580 8,182 7,737 8,150
Basic net income per share attributable to REX common shareholders
$
2.16
$
2.68
$
2.62
$
5.36
Weighted average shares outstanding diluted 7,580 8,182 7,737 8,166
Diluted net income per share attributable to REX common shareholders
$
2.16
$
2.68
$
2.62
$
5.35
Amounts attributable to REX common shareholders:
Income from continuing operations, net of tax $ 16,367 $ 21,914 $ 20,294 $ 43,653
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax
-
(7
)
- (4 )
Net income $ 16,367 $ 21,907 $ 20,294 $ 43,649
REX AMERICAN RESOURCES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(in thousands) Unaudited
ASSETS:
July 31,
2015
January 31,
2015
CURRENT ASSETS:
Cash and cash equivalents $ 138,107 $ 137,697
Restricted cash 203 -
Accounts receivable 13,736 8,794
Inventory 23,250 18,062
Refundable income taxes 2,958 3,019
Prepaid expenses and other 5,854 5,810
Deferred taxes-net
2,363
2,363
Total current assets 186,471 175,745
Property and equipment-net 189,056 194,447
Other assets 8,118 6,366
Equity method investments 41,778 80,389
TOTAL ASSETS $ 425,423 $ 456,947
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
Accounts payable trade $ 11,975 $ 9,210
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities
8,223
10,347
Total current liabilities
20,198
19,557
LONG TERM LIABILITIES:
Deferred taxes 34,999 42,768
Other long term liabilities 797 1,658
Total long term liabilities
35,796
44,426
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
EQUITY:
REX shareholders equity:
Common stock, 45,000 shares authorized, 29,853 shares issued at par 299 299
Paid in capital 144,801 144,791
Retained earnings 464,732 444,438
Treasury stock, 22,715 shares
(285,745
)
(239,557
)
Total REX shareholders equity 324,087 349,971
Non-controlling interests 45,342 42,993
Total equity
369,429
392,964
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY $ 425,423 $ 456,947
REX AMERICAN RESOURCES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(in thousands) Unaudited
Six Months Ended
July 31,
2015
2014
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net income $ 23,150 $ 50,918
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, impairment charges and amortization 9,430 8,350
Income from equity method investments (6,543 ) (15,542 )
Gain on sale of investment (10,385 ) -
Gain on disposal of property and equipment, net (495 ) (3 )
Dividends received from equity method investments 5,638 8,592
Derivative financial instruments - (770 )
Deferred income tax (8,644 ) 5,323
Stock based compensation expense 10 -
Excess tax benefit from stock option exercises - (441 )
Changes in assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable (2,754 ) 2,494
Inventories (5,188 ) 2,083
Other assets 192 463
Accounts payable-trade 261 (198 )
Other liabilities (2,110 ) 353
Net cash provided by operating activities 2,562 61,622
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Capital expenditures (5,865 ) (3,402 )
Restricted cash (203 ) 500
Restricted investment and deposits 250 273
Proceeds from sale of investment 45,476 -
Proceeds from sale of real estate and property and equipment, net 1,935 487
Other 12 -
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities 41,605 (2,142 )
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Payments of long term debt
- (13,726 )
Stock options exercised - 931
Payments to noncontrolling interests holders (507 ) (39 )
Excess tax benefit from stock option exercises - 441
Treasury stock acquired (43,250 ) -
Net cash used in financing activities (43,757 ) (12,393 )
NET INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS 410 47,087
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS-Beginning of year 137,697 105,149
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS-End of year $ 138,107 $ 152,236
Non cash investing activities Accrued capital expenditures $ 370 $ 239
Non cash financing activities Accrued treasury stock purchases $ 2,938 $ -
http://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=bwnews&sty=20150827005170r1&sid=acqr7&distro=nx&lang=en
View source version on businesswire.com: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150827005170/en/
REX American Resources Corporation
Douglas Bruggeman, 937-276-3931
Chief Financial Officer
or
JCIR
Joseph Jaffoni, Norberto Aja
212-835-8500
rex@jcir.com
Source: REX American Resources Corporation
value1008
10 years ago
http://www.platts.com/latest-news/agriculture/dallas/us-epa-to-base-2014-rfs-on-actual-output-blend-21016342
US EPA to base 2014 RFS on actual output; blend wall to factor in 2015/2016 rule
Dallas (Platts)--19Feb2015/1249 pm EST/1749 GMT
The US Environmental Protection Agency plans to base its 2014 Renewable Fuel Standard on actual biofuels production, an agency official said Thursday at an ethanol conference, reiterating its pledge to issue the 2014, 2015 and 2016 mandates this spring.
The 2015 standard will be based on actual biofuels production to date and a projection of fuel demand and production through the rest of the year, said Chris Grundler, director of the EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality.
That makes the 2016 standard the one to watch, Grundler said, as it will be unencumbered by actual production figures and be based on the EPA's assessment of US fueling infrastructure and its ability to absorb higher ethanol blends.
But despite the biofuels industry's claims that the blend wall is a product of the oil industry's refusal to accommodate higher ethanol blends, the EPA has no choice but to take into account the limited infrastructure for E15 and E85 when setting RFS mandates going forward, he said.
"The fact remains that we have 3,500 or so E85 stations and 10 [million] to 11 million flex-fuel vehicles," Grundler said on the sidelines of the National Ethanol Conference. "That will limit how much ethanol we can use in this country, at least for the short term. We can't ignore those facts."
He called the blend wall one of the "fundamental issues that have stymied" the agency in finalizing the 2014 standard.
At last year's conference, Grundler pledged to finalize the 2014 RFS by June 20, 2014. That date obviously lapsed, and the agency has since missed the November statutory deadline to finalize the 2015 RFS.
Those decisions have been delayed due to the ethanol industry's uproar over the agency's proposal to cut the biofuels blending volumes for 2014 due to what the EPA said was the inability of US fueling infrastructure to handle significant quantities of gasoline blends with more than 10% ethanol -- the so-called blend wall.
The proposed 2014 RFS, which called for 15.21 billion gallons of biofuels to be blended, down from 16.55 billion gallons in the 2013 rule, has since been tabled indefinitely.
Renewable Fuels Association President Bob Dinneen, in a keynote speech at the conference, said the proposal sent "a devastatingly negative signal ... to farmers making planting decisions, marketers weighing whether or not to install blender pumps to enable E15, and investors determining the efficacy of cellulosic ethanol market opportunities."
EPA 'REGROUPING'
The RFS requires annually increasing amounts of biofuels to be blended with the US transportation fuel supply, but gives the EPA some authority to adjust the volumes.
The ethanol industry has said the RFS statute, passed by Congress in 2005 and expanded in 2007, was intended all along to breach the blend wall to incentivize higher ethanol blends like E15 and E85.
Grundler acknowledged that goal of the statute but said practical limitations on fueling infrastructure have tied the EPA's hands.
"The whole debate is, how far, how fast, and what legal tool are you using to" adjust the annual RFS mandates, he said. "Looking at that data will clearly be part of our consideration."
In his keynote address at the conference, Grundler apologized to ethanol producers for the delays to the program.
But he cited the many time demands on his office's staff of 10 to 12, including lawsuit threats filed by the oil industry over the RFS and waiver requests filed by refineries, for the agency's failure to finalize the 2014 biofuels blending mandate.
"To me, it's simply mission critical that the RFS get back on track and that we have a long-term trajectory in this country for lowering the carbon content of transportation fuels," Grundler said. "We intend to put out a proposal this spring that will address 2014, 2015 and 2016. We believe that by doing so, we can get back on the statutory schedule that's laid out in the law."
He noted that the RFS carries significant implications in economic, agriculture, environmental and energy policy, which are sometimes at odds with each other. To that point, he said that 340,000 comments were filed on the proposed 2014 RFS.
"We have to figure out how we're going to advance this cause in the face of flat and, indeed, declining gasoline demand going in the future," Grundler said. "We have to overcome the current market limitations, the so-called blend wall. ... And, of course, whether and on what basis the statutory volumes should be lowered in light of these considerations.
"In the next few months, we are regrouping. We are going to try to answer these questions."
--Herman Wang, herman.wang@platts.com
--Edited by Annie Siebert, ann.siebert@platts.com
Trade smarter, not harder: Unleash your inner pro with our toolkit and live discussions.
ValueInvestor15
8 years ago
stocktrademan
9 years ago
Hot Features
Premium
