Item 1. Business
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. (the “Partnership” or “Registrant”) is a Delaware limited partnership, which operates as a commodity investment pool. The Partnership was organized on April 6, 2004 to engage in the speculative trading of a diversified portfolio of commodity interests including futures contracts, options on futures contracts and forward contracts. The Partnership’s limited partnership agreement provides, among other things, that the Partnership shall dissolve no later than December 31, 2052.
Beacon Management Corporation (USA), the general partner and trading advisor of the Partnership (the “General Partner”), is registered as a commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor with the National Futures Association (the “NFA”), an industry self-regulatory organization. In addition to making all trading decisions in its capacity as trading advisor, Beacon Management Corporation (USA) conducts and manages all aspects of business and administration of the Partnership in its role as General Partner. UBS Financial Services currently serves as the Partnership’s sole clearing broker. The Partnership may also use Man Financial as an additional clearing broker.
The Partnership originally filed a registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the sale of a minimum of $1,000,000 and a maximum of $200,000,000 in Units of Limited Partnership Interest at $1,000 each, which registration statement was effective on May 13, 2005. Since May 16, 2005, Units of Limited Partnership Interest of the Partnership have been offered on an ongoing basis during the Partnership’s continuing offering period. During the continuing offering period, subscriptions are accepted monthly and proceeds are transferred to bank and brokerage accounts for trading purposes. The Unit selling price during the continuing offering period is the net asset value per unit as of the last business day of the month in which the subscription is accepted.
The Partnership commenced operations on May 16, 2005. The General Partner and limited partners share in the profits and losses of the Partnership in proportion to their respective ownership interests.
Regulation
As a commodity investment pool, the Partnership is subject to the regulations of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, an agency of the United States (U.S.) government, which regulates most aspects of the commodity futures industry; rules of the NFA; and the requirements of commodity exchanges and Futures Commission Merchants (brokers) through which the Partnership trades. As a registrant with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Partnership is subject to the regulatory requirements under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Operations
A description of the business of the Partnership, including trading approach, rights and obligations of the Partners, and compensation arrangements is contained in the Prospectus under “Summary,” “Risk Factors,” “The General Partner,” “Conflicts of Interest” and “Charges to the Partnership,” and such description is incorporated herein by reference from the Prospectus.
The Partnership conducts its business in one industry segment, the speculative trading of futures, forwards and swap contracts. The Partnership is a market participant in the “managed futures” industry. The managed futures industry has grown substantially
in the previous ten years. Market participants include all types of investors, such as corporations, employee benefit plans, individuals and foreign investors. Service providers of the managed futures industry include (a) pool operators, which conduct and manage all aspects of trading funds (except trading decisions), such as the Partnership, (b) trading advisors, which make the specific trading decisions, and (c) commodity brokers, which execute and clear the trades pursuant to the instructions of the trading advisor. The Partnership has no employees, and does not engage in the sale of goods or services.
The Partnership engages in financial instrument trading in approximately 10 financial instrument contracts on domestic markets. All of the Partnership’s assets are currently allocated to the Enhanced Financial program which is concentrated in the financial markets such as interest rates and currency. As of December 2006, the Partnership’s risk allocations (as measured by Value at Risk (“VaR”)) were -0.44% and -1.24% in interest rate and currency markets, respectively. The contracts traded by the Partnership will fluctuate from time to time.
The Partnership may, in the future, experience increased competition for the futures and other contracts in which it trades. Beacon Management Corporation (USA) will recommend similar or identical trades for other accounts under its management. Such competition may also increase due to the widespread utilization of computerized methods similar to those used by Beacon Management Corporation (USA).
Item 1A.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
•
The Partnership has a limited operating history. As a consequence, potential investors are therefore unable to consider a long period of past performance results in making a decision whether to subscribe for Partnership units.
•
The Partnership relies on the General Partner and therefore does not obtain any potential benefit from outside managers. The General Partner will make all material management and trading decisions for the Partnership. The General Partner cannot assure you that the management decisions it makes for the trading program it employs will be profitable for the Partnership or will not result in losses.
•
These are speculative securities. You could lose all or substantially all of your investment in the partnership.
•
The partnership’s trading in futures contracts, options on futures contracts and forward contracts is speculative and trading performance is expected to be volatile. You could lose your entire investment in the partnership.
•
Futures contracts are leveraged instruments, which accentuate the trading profit or trading loss on a trade.
•
The partnership is subject to certain conflicts of interest, including the ability of the general partner and its principals to trade for their own accounts, the setting of fees on a non arm’s-length basis, and any actions taken by the clearing brokers without consent from the partnership.
•
The partnership may be unable to close out open positions due to market conditions or trading limitations imposed by commodity exchanges.
•
If you redeem your units within the first six months after your initial purchase, you must pay a redemption charge equal to 4% of the net asset value of the units being redeemed; you will be charged a redemption fee equal to 3% on redemptions after the first six, but within the first eleven months, after your initial purchase.
•
The units will not be listed on an exchange and no other secondary market will exist for the units.
•
The fixed expenses of the partnership, including selling commissions, will be substantial. To break even, the partnership would need to earn an estimated annual return on assets of 3.50% assuming $50,000,000 in assets.
•
You will be taxed on your share of partnership income, even though the partnership may not make any distributions.
Item 1B.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
Not applicable.
Item 2.
Item 2. Properties.
The Partnership does not use any physical properties in the conduct of its business. Its assets currently consist of futures and other contracts and cash.
Item 3.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
Beacon Management Corporation (USA) is not aware of any material legal proceedings to which the Partnership is a party or to which any of its assets are subject.
Item 4.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
No matters were submitted to a vote of limited partners during the fiscal year 2006.
PART II
Item 5.
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
There is no established market for the Units of Limited Partnership. The Units are offered on a best efforts basis by both representatives of the General Partner and certain broker-dealers. An offering on a best efforts basis is one in which the securities dealers participating in the offering are under no obligation to purchase any of the securities being offered and, therefore, no specified number of securities are guaranteed to be sold and no specified amount of money is guaranteed to be raised. As of December 31, 2006, there were 10 Partners in the Partnership and 850.33 Units of General and Limited Partnership Interest outstanding.
Beacon Management Corporation (USA) has sole discretion in determining what distributions, if any, the Partnership will make to its Unit holders. Beacon Management Corporation (USA) has not made any distributions as of the date hereof.
The Partnership has no securities authorized for issuance under any equity compensation plans.
The following table shows for the periods indicated the high and low sales prices for units:
Item 6.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data.
The Partnership was formed on April 6, 2004 (inception) by the General Partner by an initial contribution of $1,000. There was no activity from inception to December 31, 2004. There was no significant activity from January 1, 2005 through May 15, 2005, the date the partnership began operations as commodity fund.
The following summarized quarterly financial information presents the Partnership’s results of operations for the periods ending March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31, 2006.
Units in the Partnership are being offered on a continuous basis at closing dates at a price equal to the net asset value per unit at the close of business on each applicable closing date, which is the last business day of each month. Purchases and sales of units during the fourth quarter of 2006 were as follows:
Item 7.
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
Introduction
The offering of its Units of Limited Partnership Interest commenced on May 13, 2005 and the Partnership commenced operations on May 16, 2005. The continuing offering period commenced at the termination of the initial offering period and is ongoing.
Critical Accounting Policies
The General Partner believes that the accounting policies most critical to the Partnership’s financial condition and results of operations relate to the valuation of the Partnership’s positions. The majority of the Partnership’s positions are exchange-traded futures contracts, which are valued daily at settlement prices published by the exchanges. Any spot and forward foreign currency contracts held by the Partnership are valued at published daily settlement prices or at dealers’ quotes. Thus, the General Partner expects that under normal circumstances substantially all of the Partnership’s assets are valued on a daily basis using objective measures.
Capital Resources
The Partnership will raise additional capital only through the sale of Units offered pursuant to the continuing offering, and does not intend to raise any capital through borrowing. Due to the nature of the Partnership’s business, it will make no capital expenditures and will have no capital assets that are not operating capital or assets.
Liquidity
Most United States commodity exchanges limit fluctuations in futures contracts prices during a single day by regulations referred to as “daily price fluctuation limits” or “daily limits.” During a single trading day, no trades may be executed at prices beyond the daily limit. This may affect the Partnership’s ability to initiate new positions or close existing ones or may prevent it from having orders executed. Futures prices have occasionally moved the daily limit for several consecutive days with little or no trading. Similar occurrences could prevent the Partnership from promptly liquidating unfavorable positions and subject the Partnership to substantial losses, which could exceed the margin initially committed to such trades. In general, the Partnership will be required to have 9%-17% of its assets committed to margin on deposit with the broker. In addition, even if futures prices have not moved the daily limit, the Partnership may not be able to execute futures trades at favorable prices if little trading in such contracts is taking place.
Trading in forward contracts introduces a possible further impact on liquidity. Because such contracts are executed “off exchange” between private parties, the time required to offset or “unwind” these positions may be greater than that for regulated instruments. This potential delay could be exacerbated to the extent a counterparty is not a United States person.
Other than these limitations on liquidity, which are inherent in the Partnership’s futures trading operations, the Partnership’s assets are expected to be highly liquid.
Results of Operations
The rate of return for the year ended December 31, 2006 was -5.79%.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The Partnership posted a loss for January. The currency sector posted a loss led by the British pound. The British pound traded to a higher price relative to the U.S. dollar reversing a trend that began in early 2005. After declining nearly 10% since the beginning of 2005, the British pound increased in value sharply during January. Among the other major foreign currencies, the Canadian dollar, Australian dollar, euro, and Swiss franc gained relative to the U.S. dollar and the Japanese yen was unchanged. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month led by the Eurodollar market, as the trend toward higher short-term U.S. interest rates resumed. This price movement reflected the expectation that the Federal Reserve will continue to raise short-term interest rates during the months ahead. The remaining interest rate contracts generated small losses as the yield curve continued to invert with short maturity yields increasing relative to longer maturity yields.
The Partnership posted a loss for February. The currency sector posted a loss led by the Japanese yen. The Japanese yen traded to a higher price relative to the U.S. dollar reversing a trend that began in early 2005. After declining nearly 14% since the beginning of 2005, the yen increased in value in early January, declined in late January, and then increased in value during February. Among the other major foreign currencies, the British pound, Australian dollar, Euro currency unit, and Swiss franc declined relative to the U.S. dollar, and the Canadian dollar increased relative to the U.S. dollar. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month led by the Eurodollar market, as the trend toward higher short-term U.S. interest rates resumed. This price movement reflected the expectation that the Federal Reserve would continue to raise short-term interest rates during the months ahead. The remaining interest rate contracts generated mixed results with the 10-Year and 5-Year Treasury Note generating small gains and the 30-Year Treasury Bond a small loss as the yield curve continued to invert with short maturity yields increasing relative to longer maturity yields.
The Partnership posted a gain for March. The currency sector posted a loss led by the Canadian Dollar. The Canadian Dollar declined to a lower price relative to the U.S. dollar reversing a trend that began in May 2005. After increasing nearly 10% during the last 10 months, the Canadian Dollar decreased in value nearly 4% during March. Among the other major foreign currencies, the British Pound, Australian Dollar, Japanese Yen, and Swiss Franc declined relative to the U.S. dollar, and the Euro Currency Unit increased relative to the U.S. dollar. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month again led by the Eurodollar market, as the trend toward higher short-term U.S. interest rates resumed. This price movement reflected the expectation that the Federal Reserve will continue to raise short-term interest rates during the months ahead. The remaining interest rate contracts also generated positive results with the 30-Year Treasury Bond and 10-Year and 5-Year Treasury Notes generating gains reflecting higher long-term interest rates.
The Partnership posted a loss for April. The currency sector posted a loss led by the Japanese Yen. The Japanese Yen reversed a trend toward a lower price relative to the U.S. dollar. During the last 16 months, from January 2005, the Japanese Yen has weakened relative to the U.S. dollar by nearly 18%. During April, the trend reversed with this Japanese currency appreciating by nearly 5% from the early April low price. The other major foreign currencies, the British Pound, Australian Dollar, Canadian Dollar, Swiss Franc, and Euro Currency, increased relative to the U.S. dollar. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month again led by the Eurodollar market, as the trend toward higher short-term U.S. interest rates continued. This price movement reflected the expectation that the Federal Reserve will continue to raise short-term interest rates during the months ahead. The remaining interest rate contracts also generated positive results with the 30-Year Treasury Bond and 10-Year and 5-Year Treasury Notes generating gains reflecting higher long-term interest rates.
The Partnership posted a gain for May. The currency sector posted a gain led by the British Pound. The British Pound continued a trend toward a higher value relative to the U.S. dollar during May. A recent British Pound low relative to the U.S. dollar was established in January 2006. During the last five months, the U.S. dollar has declined by nearly 8% relative to this United Kingdom currency with the largest part of this move during May. Of the other major foreign currencies, the Canadian Dollar, Swiss Franc, and Euro Currency, increased relative to the U.S. dollar while the Japanese Yen and Australian Dollar were basically unchanged. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month again led by the Eurodollar market, as the trend toward higher short-term U.S. interest rates continued. This price movement reflected the expectation that the Federal Reserve will continue to raise short-term interest rates during the months ahead. The remaining interest rate contracts also generated positive results with the 30-Year Treasury Bond and 10-Year and 5-Year Treasury Notes generating gains reflecting a steeper Treasury yield curve and higher long-term interest rates.
The Partnership posted a loss for June. The currency sector posted a loss led by the British Pound. The British Pound reversed a trend toward a higher value relative to the U.S. dollar during June. A recent British Pound high relative to the U.S. dollar was established in early May 2006 after a multi-month increase. During June, the U.S. dollar appreciated by nearly 4% relative to this United Kingdom currency reversing one half of the previous months’ gain. The other major foreign currencies, the Canadian Dollar, Swiss Franc, Japanese Yen, Australian Dollar and Euro Currency, also all decreased in value relative to the U.S. dollar. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month again led by the Eurodollar market, as the trend toward higher short-term U.S. interest rates continued. This price movement reflected the expectation that the Federal Reserve will continue to raise short-term interest rates during the months ahead. Of the remaining interest rate contracts, the 5-Year Treasury Note generated positive results and the 30-Year Treasury Bond and 10-Year Treasury Note generated small losses reflecting mixed signals towards a further steepening of the Treasury yield curve and higher long-term interest rates.
The Partnership posted a loss for July. The currency sector posted a loss led by the Japanese Yen. During the first few trading days of July, the Japanese Yen reversed a trend that began mid-May toward a lower value relative to the U.S. dollar. After trading higher, the Japanese Yen reversed direction and traded lower relative the U.S. Dollar. Finally, at the end of the month, the Japanese Yen again traded higher, ending the month nearly unchanged. Of the other major foreign currencies, the Swiss Franc and Euro Currency exhibited similar volatile trade. The British Pound and Australian Dollar increased in value relative to the U.S. dollar and the Canadian Dollar decreased in value. The interest rate sector posted a loss for the month led by the 5-Year Treasury Note. After trending toward higher interest rates, lower prices since January, the trend reversed during July. The expectation is that the Federal Reserve will pause in increasing short-term rates and that inflation will remain at a moderate level. The remaining interest rate contracts, the Eurodollar future, the 30-Year Treasury Bond, and 10-Year Treasury Note, all contributed to the loss as they traded toward lower interest rates, higher prices shifting the yield curve to slightly lower overall interest rate level.
The Partnership posted a gain for August. The currency sector posted a gain led by the Japanese Yen. The Japanese Yen continued a trend that began mid-May toward a lower value relative to the U.S. Dollar. After trading higher in July, the Japanese Yen reversed direction and traded lower relative the U.S. Dollar. Of the other major foreign currencies, the Canadian Dollar increased in value relative to the U.S. Dollar. The Swiss Franc, Euro Currency, British Pound, and Australian Dollar traded in a narrow range and ended the month unchanged relative to U.S. Dollar. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month led by the 30-Year Treasury Bond which continued a trend toward lower interest rates, higher prices that began late June. Of the remaining interest rate contracts, the 5-Year Treasury Note and 10-Year Treasury Note, contributed to the gain as they traded toward lower interest rates, higher prices, while the Eurodollar contributed a loss as the yield curve shifted to a slightly lower overall interest rate level.
The Partnership posted a loss for September. The currency sector posted a loss led by the British Pound. During September, the British Pound reversed a trend that began in January toward a higher value relative to the U.S. Dollar. After reaching a contract high in early August, the British Pound reversed direction and traded lower relative the U.S. Dollar. Of the other major foreign currencies, the Japanese Yen and Australian Dollar decreased in value relative to the U.S. Dollar. The Swiss Franc, Euro Currency, and Canadian Dollar traded in a narrow range and ended the month slightly lower relative to U.S. Dollar. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month led by the 30-Year Treasury Bond. The 30-Year Treasury Bond continued a trend toward lower interest rates, higher prices that began late June. Of the remaining interest rate contracts, the Eurodollar, 5-Year Treasury Note, and 10-Year Treasury Note all contributed to the gain as they traded toward lower interest rates, higher prices. This movement reflects a general flattening of the yield curve and a shift to a slightly lower overall interest rate level.
The Partnership posted a loss for October. The currency sector posted a loss led by the Canadian Dollar. During October, the Canadian Dollar value relative to the U.S. Dollar was volatile. The value declined early in the month. Mid-month, the trend reversed with the currency gaining relative to the U.S. Dollar. And finally, at month end, the value settled slightly lower relative to the U.S. Dollar. Of the other major foreign currencies, the British Pound and Australian Dollar increased in value relative to the U.S. Dollar. The Swiss Franc, Euro Currency, and Japanese Yen initially traded lower but ended the month unchanged relative to U.S. Dollar.
The interest rate sector posted a loss for the month led by the Eurodollar. The Eurodollar, reflecting short-term U.S. interest rates, reversed a trend toward lower short-term rates that began in early July 2006. During the first three weeks of October, short-term rates moved steadily higher. During the last week, this trend reversed slightly, but rates were still higher for the month. Of the remaining interest rate contracts, the 30-Year Treasury Bond, 5-Year Treasury Note, and 10-Year Treasury Note initially moved lower in price, higher in yield, in sympathy with short-term rates but ended the month nearly unchanged.
The Partnership posted a loss for November. The currency sector posted a gain led by the Canadian Dollar. During November, the Canadian Dollar resumed a trend towards a lower value relative to the U.S. Dollar that began in May 2006. All of the other major foreign currencies, the British Pound, Australian Dollar, Japanese Yen, Euro Currency, and Swiss Franc, increased in value relative to the U.S. Dollar. The interest rate sector posted a gain for the month led by the 30-Year Treasury Bond. The 30-Year Treasury Bond, reflecting long-term U.S. interest rates, continued a trend toward lower long-term interest rates that began in early July 2006. Of the remaining interest rate contracts, the 5-Year Treasury Note and 10-Year Treasury Note moved higher in price, lower in yield, and the Eurodollar traded in a narrow range early in the month, but also ended the month on a firm tone.
The Partnership posted a gain for December (net of a reimbursement of offering expenses by the General Partner). The currency sector posted a gain led by the Canadian Dollar. During November, the Canadian Dollar continued a trend towards a lower value relative to the U.S. Dollar that began in May 2006. All of the other major foreign currencies, the British Pound, Australian Dollar, Japanese Yen, Euro Currency, and Swiss Franc, also decreased in value relative to the U.S. Dollar. The interest rate sector posted a loss for the month led by the 30-Year Treasury Bond. The 30-Year Treasury Bond, reflecting long-term U.S. interest rates, reversed a trend toward lower long-term interest rates that began in early July 2006. During the previous five months, long-term rates had moved steadily lower. December reversed this trend. The remaining interest rate contracts, the 10-Year Treasury Note, 5-Year Treasury Note, and Eurodollar, moved lower in price, higher in yield, reflecting a gradual shift to higher U.S. interest rates along the yield curve.
Off-Balance Sheet Risk
The term “off-balance sheet risk” refers to an unrecorded potential liability that, even though it does not appear on the balance sheet, may result in future obligation or loss. The Partnership trades in futures and forward contracts and may therefore become a party to financial instruments with elements of off-balance sheet market and credit risk. In entering into these contracts, there exists a market risk that such contracts may be significantly influenced by conditions, such as interest rate volatility, resulting in such contracts being less valuable. If the markets should move against all of the futures interests positions of the Partnership at the same time, and if the General Partner was unable to offset such positions, the Partnership could experience substantial losses. The General Partner accesses daily positions and profit and loss summaries for the Partnership and employs various measures to monitor draw-downs, market diversification and leverage.
In addition to market risk, in entering into futures and forward contracts there is a credit risk that a counterparty will not be able to meet its obligations to the Partnership. The counterparty for futures contracts traded in the United States and on most foreign exchanges is the clearinghouse associated with such exchange. In general, clearinghouses are backed by the corporate members of the clearinghouse who are required to share any financial burden resulting from the non-performance by one of their members and, as such, should significantly reduce this credit risk. In cases where the clearinghouse is not backed by the clearing members, like some foreign exchanges, it is normally backed by a consortium of banks or other financial institutions.
In the case of forward and swap contracts, which are traded on the interbank market rather than on exchanges, the counterparty is generally a single bank or other financial institution, rather than a group of financial institutions; thus there may be a greater counterparty credit risk. Beacon Management Corporation (USA) trades for the Partnership only with those counterparties which it believes to be creditworthy. All positions of the Partnership are valued each day on a mark-to-market basis. There can be no assurance that any clearing member, clearinghouse or other counterparty will be able to meet its obligations to the Partnership.
Disclosures About Certain Trading Activities that Include Non-Exchange Traded Contracts Accounted for at Fair Value
The Partnership invests in futures and forward contracts. The market value of futures (exchange-traded) contracts is determined by the various futures exchanges, and reflects the settlement price for each contract as of the close of the last business day of the reporting period. The market value of forward (non-exchange traded) contracts is extrapolated on a forward basis from the spot prices quoted as of 5:00 P.M. (E.T.) of the last business day of the reporting period or based on the market value of its exchange-traded equivalent.
Item 7A.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
INTRODUCTION
Past Results Not Necessarily Indicative of Future Performance.
The Partnership is a speculative commodity pool. The market sensitive instruments held by it are acquired for speculative trading purposes, and all or a substantial amount of the Partnership’s assets are subject to the risk of trading loss. Unlike an operating company, the risk of market sensitive instruments is integral, not incidental, to the Partnership’s main line of business.
Market movements can produce frequent changes in the fair market value of the Partnership’s open positions and, consequently, in its earnings and cash flow. The Partnership’s market risk is influenced by a wide variety of factors, including the level and volatility of exchange rates, interest rates, equity price levels, the market value of financial instruments and contracts, the diversification effects among the Partnership’s open positions and the liquidity of the markets in which it trades.
The Partnership may rapidly acquire and liquidate both long and short positions in a wide range of different markets. Consequently, it is not possible to predict how a particular future market scenario will affect performance, and the Partnership’s past performance is not necessarily indicative of its future results.
Value at Risk is a measure of the maximum amount which the Partnership could reasonably be expected to lose in a given market sector. However, the inherent uncertainty of the Partnership’s speculative trading and the recurrence in the markets traded by the Partnership of market movements far exceeding expectations could result in actual trading or non-trading losses far beyond the indicated Value at Risk or the Partnership’s experience to date (i.e., “risk of ruin”). In light of this, as well as the risks and uncertainties intrinsic to all future projections, the inclusion of the quantification included in this section should not be considered to constitute any assurance or representation that the Partnership’s losses in any market sector will be limited to Value at Risk or by the Partnership’s attempts to manage its market risk.
Standard of Materiality
Materiality as used in this section, “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk,” is based on an assessment of reasonably possible market movements and the potential losses caused by such movements, taking into account the leverage, and multiplier features of the Partnership’s market sensitive instruments.
Quantifying the Partnership’s Trading Value at Risk
Quantitative Forward-Looking Statements
The following quantitative disclosures regarding the Partnership’s market risk exposures contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor from civil liability provided for such statements by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (set forth in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). All quantitative disclosures in this section are deemed to be forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor, except for statements of historical fact (such as the dollar amount of maintenance margin required for market risk sensitive instruments held at the end of the reporting period).
The Partnership’s risk exposure in the various market sectors traded by the Partnership is quantified below in terms of Value at Risk (“VaR”). The Partnership estimates VaR using a model based on historical simulation (with a confidence level of 97.5%) which involves constructing a distribution of hypothetical daily changes in the value of the trading portfolio. The VaR model takes into account linear exposures to risks, including equity and commodity prices, interest rates, and correlation among these variables. The hypothetical changes in portfolio value are based on daily percentage changes observed in key market indices or other market factors to which the portfolio is sensitive. The one day 97.5 confidence level of the Partnership’s VaR corresponds to the negative change in portfolio value that, based on observed market risk factors, would have been exceeded once in 40 trading days or one day in 40. VaR typically does not represent the worst case outcome.
The Partnership uses approximately one year of daily market data and revalues its portfolio for each of the historical market moves that occurred over the period. This generates a probability distribution of daily “simulated profit and loss” outcomes. The VaR is the 2.5 percentile of this distribution.
The VaR for a sector represents the one day downside risk for the aggregate exposures associated with this sector. The aggregate VaR represents the VaR of the Partnership’s open positions across all market sectors, and is less than the sum of the VaRs for all such market sectors due to the diversification benefit across asset classes.
The Partnership’s VaR computations are based on the risk representation of the underlying benchmark for each instrument or contract and does not distinguish between exchange and non-exchange dealer-based instruments. It is also not based on exchange and/or dealer based maintenance margin requirements.
VaR models, including the Partnership’s, are continually evolving as trading portfolios become more diverse and modeling techniques and systems capabilities improve. Please note that the VaR model is used to numerically quantify market risk for historic reporting purposes only and is not utilized by the Partnership in its daily risk management activities. Please further note that VaR as described above may not be comparable to similarly titled measures used by other entities.
Due to the Partnership’s mark-to-market accounting, any loss in the fair value of the Partnership’s open positions is directly reflected in the Partnership’s earnings (realized or unrealized).
THE PARTNERSHIP’S TRADING CAPITAL AT RISK IN DIFFERENT MARKET SECTORS
Value at Risk and Trading Gains/Losses by Sector
For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005
Of the return for the three months ended December 31, 2006, approximately -0.26% was due to trading losses net of commissions, 4.52% due to interest income, and -10.05% due to fees and operating costs borne by the Partnership giving a net return of -5.79%.
Of the return for the three months ended December 31, 2005, approximately 3.16 was due to trading losses net of commissions, 2.61% due to interest income, and -6.45 due to fees and operating costs borne by the Partnership giving a net return of -0.68%.
Material Limitations on Value at Risk as an Assessment of Market Risk
The face value of the market sector instruments held by the Partnership may typically be many times the risk determined by the VaR calculation. The magnitude of the Partnership’s open positions could create a “risk of ruin” not typically found in most other
investment vehicles. Because of the size of its positions, certain market conditions - unusual, but historically recurring from time to time - could cause the Partnership to incur severe losses over a short period of time. The Value at Risk tables - as well as the past performance of the Partnership - give no indication of this “risk of ruin.”
The highly dynamic nature of the Partnership’s portfolio limits the usability of an analysis method (such as VaR), which relies upon the Partnership’s positions as of a single point in time.
Historical price behavior (which is relied upon by the VaR calculation) may not be an accurate predictor of the future price behavior of the markets in the Partnership’s portfolio.
Non-Trading Risk
The Partnership may experience non-trading market risk on any foreign cash balances not needed for margin. However, these balances (as well as the market risk they represent) are expected to be immaterial. The Partnership also may have non-trading market risk as a result of investing in U.S. Treasury Bills. The market risk represented by these investments is expected to be immaterial.
Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Primary Trading Risk Exposures
The following qualitative disclosures regarding the Partnership’s market risk exposures - except for (i) those disclosures that are statements of historical fact and (ii) the descriptions of how the Partnership manages its primary market risk exposures - constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act. The Partnership’s primary market risk exposures as well as the strategies used and to be used by the General Partner for managing such exposures are subject to numerous uncertainties, contingencies and risks, any one of which could cause the actual results of the Partnership’s risk controls to differ materially from the objectives of such strategies. Government interventions, defaults and expropriations, illiquid markets, the emergence of dominant fundamental factors, political upheavals, changes in historical price relationships, an influx of new market participants, increased regulation and many other factors could result in material losses as well as in material changes to the risk exposures and the risk management strategies of the Partnership. There can be no assurance that the Partnership’s market exposure and/or risk management strategies will not change materially or that any such strategies will be effective in either the short- or long-term. Investors must be prepared to lose all or substantially all of their investment in the Partnership.
The primary risk exposures of the Partnership as of December 31, 2006 are exchange rate and interest rate risk. The factors that can influence these rates can be domestic or foreign (primarily the G-7 countries) and include (but are not limited to) changes in government fiscal policy, changes in the balance of trade, changes in inflation rates and improvement or degradation of the overall economy.
Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Non-Trading Risk Exposure
The following were the only non-trading risk exposures of the Partnership as of December 31, 2006:
The Partnership may experience non-trading market risk on any foreign cash balances not needed for margin. However, these balances (as well as the market risk they represent) are expected to be immaterial. The Partnership also may have non-trading market risk as a result of investing in U.S. Treasury Bills. The market risk represented by these investments is expected to be immaterial.
Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Means of Managing Risk Exposure
The means by which the Partnership attempts to manage the risk of the Partnership’s open positions is essentially the same in all market categories traded. The General Partner applies risk management policies to trading which generally are designed to limit the total exposure that may be taken per “risk unit” of assets under management. In addition, the General Partner follows diversification guidelines (often formulated in terms of the balanced volatility between markets and correlated groups), as well as adopting non-binding “stop-loss” points for each of the markets in which the Partnership trades.
General
The Partnership is unaware of any (i) anticipated known demands, commitments or capital expenditures; (ii) material trends, favorable or unfavorable, in its capital resources; or (iii) trends or uncertainties that will have a material effect on operations. From time to time, certain regulatory agencies have proposed increased margin requirements on futures contracts. Because the Partnership generally will use a small percentage of assets as margin, the Partnership does not believe that any increase in margin requirements, as proposed, will have a material effect on the Partnership’s operations.
Item 8.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Financial statements meeting the requirements of Regulation S-X appear beginning on Page 19 of this report. The supplementary financial information specified by Item 302 of Regulation S-K is included in Item 6. Selected Financial Data.
Item 9.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
On January 12, 2007, The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. (the “Partnership”) was notified that a majority of the partners of Altschuler, Melvoin and Glasser LLP (“AM&G”) had become partners of McGladrey & Pullen, LLP (“M&P”) and, as a consequence, that AM&G was compelled to resign and would no longer be the auditor for the Partnership. M&P was appointed as the Partnership’s new auditor.
The report of AM&G on the Partnership’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2005 did not contain an adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion, nor was it qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting principles.
During the period from August 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005 and through January 12, 2007, neither the Partnership nor anyone on its behalf consulted M&P regarding either the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on the Partnership’s financial statements, nor had M&P provided to the Partnership a written report or oral advice regarding such principles or audit opinion.
During the interim period from August 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005 and through January 12, 2007, there were no disagreements with AM&G on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of AM&G, would have caused it to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreements in connection with their respective report on the financial statements for such period.
Effective August 1, 2005, the Partnership engaged AM&G as the Partnership’s auditor to audit the Partnership’s financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2005. AM&G replaced Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”), which had previously been engaged for the same purpose, and whose dismissal was effective July 15, 2005. The decision to change the Partnership’s principal accountants was approved by the Partnership’s General Partner on July 8, 2005.
The report of Deloitte on the Partnership’s financial statements of financial condition as of December 31, 2004 did not contain an adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion, nor was it qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting principles.
During the period through December 31, 2004, and in the subsequent interim period through August 1, 2005, neither the Partnership nor anyone on its behalf consulted AM&G regarding either the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion that might be rendered on the Partnership’s financial statements, nor had AM&G provided to the Partnership a written report or oral advice regarding such principles or audit opinion.
During the period through December 31, 2004 and in the subsequent interim period through July 8, 2005, there were no disagreements with Deloitte on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of Deloitte, would have caused it to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreements in connection with their respective report on the financial statements for such period.
Item 9A.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Beacon Management Corporation (USA), the General Partner of the Partnership, with the participation of the General Partner’s chief executive officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of its disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e)) with respect to the Partnership as of the end of the year covered by this annual report. Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures were effective, except as discussed in the next paragraph below, in timely alerting him to material information relating to the Partnership required to be included in our periodic filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. It should be noted that in designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures. The General Partner has designed its disclosure controls and procedures to reach a level of reasonable assurance of achieving desired control objectives and, based on the evaluation described above, the General Partner’s Chief Executive Officer concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures were effective at reaching that level of reasonable assurance, except as discussed in the next paragraph below.
The General Partner has identified a material weakness within its internal control framework relating to the preparation and timeliness of financial reporting and in connection with the adequacy of segregation of duties. The General Partner attributes this material weakness to limited personnel resources. Though the partnership has implemented levels of supervisory reviews and employs a temporary workforce from time to time, there can be no assurance that these measures can definitively prevent transactional errors from occurring or provide the necessary accounting and financial reporting support to the General Partner’s accounting and finance department.
There was no change in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) during the twelve months ended December 31, 2006 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, its internal control over financial reporting.
Item 9B.
Item 9B. Other Information
There was no information required to be disclosed in a report on form 8-K during the fourth quarter of 2006.
PART III
Item 10.
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant
The Partnership has no directors or executive officers. The Partnership has no employees. It is managed by Beacon Management Corporation (USA) in its capacity as General Partner. Beacon Management Corporation (USA) has been registered as a commodity pool operator (CPO) since September 1982. Its main business address is 116 Village Boulevard, Suite 210 Princeton, New Jersey 08540, (609) 514-1801. Beacon Management Corporation (USA)’s directors and executive officers are as follows:
Grant W. Schaumburg, Jr., age 61, is the chairman of the General Partner. He has worked for the General Partner and affiliated firms since 1978 and began his future career as a commodity trading advisor in 1973. He participated in management consulting work for large corporations and contract research for government agencies from 1970 to 1982. He was a partner of Comtrade Associates, a commodity trading advisor that managed futures accounts from 1980 to 1982. Mr. Schaumburg served as trading systems manager for Commodities Corporation from 1982 to 1987, and also was an associated person with that firm from 1984 to 1993. He was a founder of Mount Lucas Management Corporation and Mount Lucas Index Management Corporation, and was president of these firms from their inception through July 1999. Mr. Schaumburg is registered as a commodity trading advisor and a commodity pool operator and is a member of the NFA. Mr. Schaumburg received an AB magna cum laude from Harvard College with highest honors in applied mathematics and a PhD in economics from Harvard University.
Mark S. Stratton, age 49, is the chief executive officer and president of the General Partner. He has worked for the General Partner and its affiliates since 1984, and became a principal in 1991. Mr. Stratton began his futures career in 1972 at Commodities Corporation where he was senior research associate. He was a founder of Mount Lucas Management Corporation and Mount Lucas Index Management Corporation and senior vice president of these firms from their inception through July 1999. He is responsible for operations, data processing, trading, and research, and developed the General Partner’s trade simulation, trade accounting and data processing software. Mr. Stratton attended the University of Chicago.
Thomas J. Nash, age 61, is vice president of administration for the General Partner. He joined the General Partner in 1999, and became a principal in July 2000. Prior to May 1990, he held a variety of positions with The Prudential Insurance Company of America and the Prudential Asset Management Company, including assignments involving marketing, marketing support, product development, and administration. From May 1990 until March 1999, he was a principal of Zaramba-Nash Financial Services, Inc., a
consulting organization that he co-founded. Mr. Nash received a BS in Marketing from Fairleigh Dickinson University, an MBA with a concentration in finance from Seton Hall University, and has worked in the finance industry since 1963.
John W. Fryback, age 59, is director of marketing for the General Partner. He is responsible for developing and maintaining relationships with institutional clients and commodity pool operators. He joined the General Partner in January 2000, and became a principal in February 2001. Mr. Fryback has worked in the field of finance since 1971, holding various futures-related positions with Reynolds Securities, Inc. from 1976 to 1979; Elms Capital Management Corp. from 1979 to 1981; Kidder Peabody & Co. Inc. from 1981 to 1988; and Chemical Bank from 1989 to 1991. From 1991 to present, Mr. Fryback has been a registered associated person and president of Fryback Associates, Inc., a consulting firm, which markets a variety of futures products for the General Partner and its affiliates as an independent contractor. Mr. Fryback is also a registered associated person of Mount Lucas Management Corporation. Mr. Fryback received a BA in business management from Indiana University and has worked in the finance industry since 1991.
There has never been a material administrative, civil or criminal action brought against Beacon Management Corporation (USA) or any of its directors, executive officers, promoters or control persons.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Based solely upon a review of the rules governing the requirements of filing Forms 3, 4 and 5 pursuant to Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, the Partnership has determined that Beacon Management Corporation (USA), Grant W. Schaumburg, Jr., Chairman of the General Partner, and Mark S. Stratton, Chief Executive Officer and President of the General Partner were each late in filing a Form 3 in 2006.
Audit Committee Financial Expert
The Board of Directors of Beacon Management Corporation (USA) has determined that Mark S. Stratton, Chief Executive Officer and President of the General Partner, qualifies as an audit committee financial expert in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Mr. Stratton is not “independent” as that term is defined in Item 7(d)(3)(iv) of Schedule 14A under the Exchange Act.
Code of Ethics
Beacon Management Corporation (USA) has adopted a code of ethics for its chief executive officer and persons performing similar functions. A copy of the code of ethics may be obtained at no charge by written request to Beacon Management Corporation (USA), 116 Village Boulevard, Suite 210, Princeton, New Jersey 08540 or by calling 1-609-514-1801.
Item 11.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
The Partnership is managed by its general partner, Beacon Management Corporation (USA). Beacon Management Corporation (USA) receives from the Partnership a Fixed Asset Fee equal to 6.3% of the Partnership’s month-end Net Assets per year. From such 6.3% Fixed Asset Fee, Beacon Management Corporation (USA) remits 3% to the broker-dealers which engaged in the distribution of the Units in return for ongoing services to the Limited Partners. Beacon Management Corporation (USA) retains the remaining 3.3% as management fees (2% for providing advisory fees and 1.3% for acting as general partner). Beacon Management Corporation (USA) also receives a performance fee of 20% of the aggregate cumulative appreciation (if any) in Net Asset Value per unit at the end of each calendar quarter, exclusive of the appreciation attributable to interest income.
Item 12.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters
(a) Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners. As of December 31, 2006, 661.45 Units of Limited Partnership are owned or held by Grant W. Schaumburg, Jr., an officer and director of Beacon Management Corporation (USA). These units represent 77.8% of the class.
Title of Class
Name of Beneficial Owner
Amount and
Nature of Beneficial
Ownership
Percent of Class
Limited Partnership Units
Grant W. Schaumburg, Jr.
511.45 Units in direct ownership
investment; 150 Units
beneficially owned through
Beacon Management
Corporation (USA)
77.8%
(b) Security Ownership of Management. As of December 31, 2006, Grant W. Schaumburg, Jr. indirectly owned 150.0 Units of Limited Partnership Interest having a value of $140,354 through Beacon Management Corporation (USA).
Item 13.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
See Item 11, Executive Compensation and Item 12, Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.
Item 14.
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services
M&P and RSM McGladrey, Inc. (“RSM”), an affiliate of M&P, have billed and anticipate billing the Partnership as follows for the year ended December 31, 2006. As we have previously discussed, a majority of the partners of AM&G became partners of M&P. As a consequence, AM&G resigned as auditors of the Partnership effective January 12, 2007 and M&P were appointed as auditors for the Partnership’s annual financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2006. AM&G and RSM billed the Partnership as follows for the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2005:
M&P, AM&G, and RSM have billed and anticipate billing the Partnership as follows for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.
(a) Audit Fees:
Audit fees consist of fees for professional services rendered for the audit of the Partnership’s financial statements as well as services normally provided by the independent accountant in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements.
Quarterly fees consist of fees for review of financial statements included in the Partnership’s quarterly reports.
(b) Audit-Related Fees.
There were no audit related fees billed by M&P or AM&G during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.
(c) Tax Fees.
For the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, RSM provided tax compliance services, which related to the preparation of U.S. and applicable state income tax returns.
(d) All Other Fees.
There were no other fees billed by M&P, AM&G or RSM during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.
(e) The Board of Directors of the General Partner approved all of the services described above. The Board of Directors has determined that the payments made to its independent accountants for these services are compatible with maintaining such auditors’ independence. The Board of Directors explicitly pre-approves all audit and non-audit services and all engagement fees and terms.
PART IV
Item 15.
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules, and Reports on Form 8-K
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this report:
1.
See Financial Statements beginning on page 18 hereof.
2.
Schedules:
Financial statement schedules have been omitted because they are not included in the financial statements or notes hereto applicable or because equivalent information has been included in the financial statements or notes thereto.
3.
Exhibits:
NUMBER
DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT
1.01
Form of Selling Group Manager Agreement among the Registrant, Beacon Management Corporation (USA) and Uhlmann Price Securities, LLC.*
1.02
Form of Selected Selling Agent Agreement between Uhlmann Price Securities, LLC and selling agents.*
3.01
Form of Limited Partnership Agreement of the Registrant (included as Exhibit A to the prospectus).*
10.01
Advisory Agreement between the Registrant and Beacon Management Corporation (USA)*
10.02
Customer Agreement between the Registrant and Man Financial Inc.*
10.03
Customer Agreement between the Registrant and UBS Securities.*
16.01
Letter from the Registrant’s former independent accountant, Deloitte & Touche LLP, regarding its concurrence the statements made by the registrant in its current report on Form 8-K dated July 18, 2005 concerning their dismissal as the registrant’s principal accountant.*
16.02
Letter from the Registrant’s former independent accountant, Altschuler, Melvoin and Glasser LLP, regarding its concurrence the statements made by the registrant in its current report on Form 8-K dated January 12, 2007 concerning their resignation as the registrant’s principal accountant.*
20.01
Form of Subscription Requirements to be executed by each purchaser of units (included as Exhibit B to the prospectus).*
20.02
Form of Subscription Agreement and Power of Attorney to be executed by each purchaser of units (included as Exhibit C to the prospectus).*
31.01
Certification by Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
32.01
Certification by Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
* Filed Previously
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized on April 30, 2007.
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
By:
Beacon Management Corporation (USA).
General Partner
By:
/s/ Mark S. Stratton
Mark S. Stratton
Chief Executive Officer
THE BEACON FINANCIAL FUTURES FUND, L.P.
ANNUAL REPORT
December 31, 2006
THE BEACON FINANCIAL FUTURES FUND, L.P.
INDEX
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Partners
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
We have audited the accompanying statement of financial condition, including the condensed schedule of investments, of The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. (the “Partnership”) as of December 31, 2006 and the related statements of operations, changes in partners’ capital, cash flows and financial highlights for the year then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. as of December 31, 2006, and the results of its operations, changes in partners capital, cash flows and financial highlights for the year then ended in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
/s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
Chicago, Illinois
April 30, 2007
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Partners of
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
We have audited the accompanying statement of financial condition of The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. (the “Fund”), including the condensed schedule of investments, as of December 31, 2005 and the related statements of operations, changes in partners’ capital, cash flows and the financial highlights for the year then ended. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Fund’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. as of December 31, 2005 and the results of its operations and changes in partners’ capital, and the financial highlights for the year then ended in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
/s/ ALTSCHULER, MELVOIN AND GLASSER LLP
Chicago, Illinois
March 20, 2006
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
Statements of Financial Condition
December 31, 2006 and 2005
See Notes to the Financial Statements.
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
Condensed Schedules of Investments
December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005
16 contracts for March 2007 delivery
See Notes to the Financial Statements.
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
Statements of Operations
For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005(2)
(2)
The Partnership was formed on April 6, 2004 (inception) by the General Partner by an initial contribution of $1,000. There was no activity from inception to December 31, 2004. There was no significant activity from January 1, 2005 through May 15, 2005, the date the partnership began operations as commodity fund.
See Notes to the Financial Statements.
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
Statements of Changes in Partners’ Capital
For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 (2)
(2)
The Partnership was formed on April 6, 2004 (inception) by the General Partner by an initial contribution of $1,000. There was no activity from inception to December 31, 2004. There was no significant activity from January 1, 2005 through May 15, 2005, the date the partnership began operations as commodity fund.
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
Net Asset Value Per General and Limited Partner Unit
See Notes to the Financial Statements.
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
Statements of Cash Flows
For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005(1)
Supplemental Schedule of Noncash Financial Activities: Partner redemptions of $107,542 during 2006 were unpaid at December 31, 2006.
(1) The Partnership’s operations did not commence until May 16, 2005 and as such there were no operations, changes in partners’ capital, cash flows, or financial highlights for the period from April 12, 2004 through December 31, 2004.
See Notes to the Financial Statements.
The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P.
Financial Highlights
For the Years Ended December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005(2)
This information has been derived from information presented in the preceding financial statements. The above ratios were calculated for the partners taken as a whole. The computation of such ratios was not based on the amount of expenses assessed and income allocated to an individual partner’s capital account, which may vary from these ratios based on the timing of capital transactions and different fee arrangements (see Notes to the Financial Statements Note 2).
(1)
For the period from May 16, 2005 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2005, including certain one time expenses incurred during the initial operating period for the Partnership.
(2)
The Partnership’s operations did not commence until May 16, 2005 and as such there were no operations, changes in partners’ capital, cash flows, or financial highlights for the period April 12, 2004 through December 31, 2004.
(3)
Annualized for the period from May 16, 2005 (commencement of operations) to December 31, 2005.
(4)
Not annualized.
See Notes to the Financial Statements.
Note 1: Nature of Operations and Significant Accounting Policies
Nature of Operations: The Beacon Financial Futures Fund, L.P. (a Delaware limited partnership) (the “Partnership”) was organized on April 6, 2004 to engage in speculative trading of a diversified portfolio of commodity interests including futures, options on futures and forward contracts. The Partnership’s limited partnership agreement provides, among other things, that the Partnership shall dissolve no later than December 31, 2052. Beacon Management Corporation (USA), the general partner of the Partnership (the “General Partner”), is registered as a commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor with the National Futures Association (the “NFA”), an industry self-regulatory organization. UBS Financial Services currently serves as the Partnership’s sole clearing broker. The Partnership may also use Man Financial as an additional clearing broker. The General Partner conducts and manages the business of the Partnership. The General Partner is also the commodity trading advisor of the Partnership. The General Partner made an investment in the Partnership equal to, and will maintain its interest in, the capital of the Partnership at no less than the greater of: (a) 1% of the total investments in the Partnership by all Partners or (b) $25,000. These contributions by the General Partner need not exceed the amount described above and are evidenced by units of General Partnership Interest (“Unit(s) of General Partnership Interest”). As a commodity investment pool, the Partnership is subject to the regulations of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, an agency of the United States (U.S.) government, which regulates most aspects of the commodity futures industry; rules of the NFA; and the requirements of commodity exchanges and Futures Commission Merchants (brokers) through which the Partnership trades. As a registrant with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Partnership is subject to the regulatory requirements under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Significant Accounting Policies: The following are the significant accounting policies of the Partnership:
Use of Estimates-The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Valuation-The majority of the Partnership’s positions are exchange-traded futures contracts, which are valued daily at settlement prices published by the exchanges. Any spot and forward foreign currency contracts held by the Partnership are valued at published daily settlement prices or at dealers’ quotes.
Deposits with Brokers-The Partnership deposits funds with brokers subject to Commodity Futures Trading Commission regulations and various exchange and broker requirements. Margin requirements are satisfied by the deposit of cash with such brokers. The Partnership earns interest income on its cash deposited with the brokers.
Income Recognition-Purchases and sales of futures, options on futures, and forward contracts are recorded on the trade date, and open contracts are reflected at market value with the change in unrealized gains (losses) from one period to the next recorded in the statement of operations. Gains or losses are realized when contracts are liquidated. The specific contracts liquidated are determined by the clearing broker (in most cases on a FIFO basis). Net unrealized gains or losses on open contracts (the difference between contract trade price and quoted market price) are reflected in the statement of financial condition. Brokerage commissions include other trading fees and are charged to expense when contracts are opened.
Net Asset Value- For purposes of both financial reporting and calculation of redemption value, the “net asset value” of a unit is an amount equal to the Partnership’s net assets allocated to capital accounts represented by units, divided by the number of units outstanding. “Net assets” means the total assets of the Partnership, including all cash and cash equivalents, accrued interest and amortization of original issue discount, and the market value of all open futures contracts, options on futures contracts, forward contracts, and other assets of the Partnership, less the total liabilities of the Partnership, including, but not limited to, brokerage, incentive allocations, management fees, interest payable and extraordinary expenses.
Escrow Accounts Receivable-Represents deposits due from escrow agent for recent limited partner capital additions.
Organization and Offering Expenses-Initial organizational and offering costs were paid by Uhlmann Price Securities, LLC (the “Selling Group Manager”) and the General Partner. The Selling Group Manager and the General Partner were not reimbursed by the Partnership for such costs. Other offering costs are amortized to expense on a straight line basis over periods from nine to twelve months. In December 2006, the Beacon Management Corporation, as the General Partner of the Beacon Financial Futures Fund, LP, elected to reimburse the Fund in the amount of $52,071 for certain continuing offering expenses that had already been incurred by the Fund throughout the year. Furthermore, Beacon intends to reimburse the Partnership for any future offering expenses in excess of 0.5% of net assets per year at the time that they are incurred.
Income Taxes-The Partnership is a partnership for federal income tax purposes and Partnership income or loss will be includable in the income tax returns of the individual partners. Accordingly, the Partnership is not subject to federal income taxes.
Change in Accounting Principle-Pursuant to the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 150, “Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of both Liabilities and Equity” (FAS 150), redemptions approved by the General Partner prior to year end with a fixed effective date and fixed amount should be recorded as redemptions payable as of year end. FAS 150 became effective for the Partnership during the year ended December 31, 2005.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements-In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements. ”SFAS 157, among other things, defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and enhances disclosures about fair value measurements required under other accounting pronouncements, but does not change existing guidance as to whether or not an instrument is carried at fair value. SFAS 157 is effective for the Partnership on January 1, 2008. Management is currently evaluating the provisions of SFAS 157 and its potential effect on its financial statements.
On July 13, 2006, the FASB released FASB Interpretation No. 48 Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes (“FIN 48”). FIN 48 provides guidance for how uncertain tax positions should be recognized, measured, presented and disclosed in the financial statements. FIN 48 requires the evaluation of tax positions taken or expected to be taken in the course of preparing the Partnership’s tax returns to determine whether the tax positions are “more-likely-than-not” off being sustained by the applicable tax authority. Tax positions not deemed to meet the more-likely-than-not threshold would be recorded as a tax benefit or expense in the current year. Adoption of FIN 48 is required for the Partnership on January 1, 2007 and is to be applied to all open tax years as of the effective date. Management does not believe the guidance provided by FIN 48 will have a material effect on its financial statements.
In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108 (“SAB 108”), “Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements When Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements”, providing guidance on quantifying financial statement misstatement and implementation (e.g., restatement or cumulative effect to assets, liabilities and retained earnings) when first applying this guidance. SAB 108 is effective for the Partnership for the year ended December 31, 2006. The adoption of SAB 108 did not have a material effect on the Partnership’s financial statements.
Note 2: Unit Transactions
Limited partners may purchase units of the Partnership upon approval by the General Partner at the net asset value, as of the last day of each month or on any other date as determined by the General Partner. After holding the units for eleven months, limited partners may require the Partnership to redeem some or all of their units at the net asset value as of the last day of each month without a redemption charge. Any units redeemed before the holder has been a limited partner for six months will be assessed a redemption charge equal to 4 percent of the net asset value per unit on the date of such redemption and units redeemed after six but within eleven months will be assessed a 3 percent redemption charge. Redemption charges will be paid by the redeeming limited partner to the General Partner. Unpaid withdrawals are considered redemptions payable.
Note 3: Partnership Fees and Expenses
Fixed Asset Fee: The Partnership pays the General Partner a fixed, monthly Fixed Asset Fee of 0.525%, or 6.30% annually, of the Partnership’s month-end net asset value. Out of this Fixed Asset Fee, the General Partner pays all introducing, initial and ongoing servicing fees, management fees, trading advisory fees and any other transaction costs of the Partnership except brokerage fees, NFA, exchange and clearing fees, which are paid separately by the partnership and are estimated at 0.50% annually of net asset value. The Partnership paid fixed asset fees of $61,218 and $42,238 for the years ended December 31, 2006, and 2005, respectively. The General Partner retains any excess amount. Included in the Fixed Asset Fee are the following amounts that are earned by the General Partner and Uhlmann Price Securities, LLC, the Selling Group Manager.
•
Management Fee-paid monthly to the General Partner at a rate of 1/12th of 1.3% of the Partnership’s month-end net asset value.
•
Trading Advisory Fee-paid monthly to the General Partner at a rate of 1/12th of 2.0% of the Partnership’s month-end net asset value.
•
Selling Agent Service Fee-fee to compensate distributors of the units for the Partnership for costs incurred in the distribution of Partnership units. Such distribution costs may include commissions, payments to sales agents, promotional materials, overhead allocations and interest. The selling agent service fee is paid monthly by the Partnership at a rate of
1/12th of 3% of the Partnership’s month-end net asset value. For the first 12 months after the sale of such units, the selling agent service fee is paid monthly by the Partnership to the General Partner, as reimbursement to the General Partner for amounts advanced by the General Partner to the selling agent at the time of the sale of such units. Commencing with the 13th month after the sale of such units, the selling agent service fee is paid to the selling agent.
Incentive Fees: The Partnership makes an incentive allocation equal to 20% of trading profits to the capital account of the General Partner each quarter. Trading profits means the net new profits (realized and unrealized), excluding interest income, decreased by monthly Fixed Asset Fee and other operating expenses that are chargeable to the Partnership’s net assets, with these trading profits and items of decrease determined from the end of the last period for which an incentive fee was earned. Extraordinary expenses of the Partnership, if any, are not deducted in determining trading profits. If the Partnership makes an incentive allocation and the Partnership fails to earn new trading profits for any subsequent period, the General Partner’s capital account will retain the incentive allocation previously made. However, the Partnership will not make any subsequent incentive allocation until these losses have been recovered and the Partnership has again earned new trading profits. There were no incentive fees earned by the General Partner for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.
Other Operating Expenses: The Partnership pays all of its own direct legal, accounting, administrative, filing, reporting and data processing expenses. The Partnership will not pay more than 0.50% of net assets in annual audit fees provided the Partnership has not issued more than $5 million in subscriptions. Any excess audit fees are reimbursed by the General Partner. As of December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, accounts receivable includes $74,242 and $3,769, respectively, that is due from the General Partner. In accordance with Section IV.C. of the NASAA Registration of Commodity Pool Programs, the Brokerage commissions of the Partnership may not exceed 14% of the Partnership’s average monthly net assets as of the last day of each month during the calendar year. The General Partner will bear any fees in excess of these limitations.
Note 4: Financial Instruments with Off-Balance-Sheet Risk
The Partnership’s trading activities involve derivative financial instruments, primarily futures, options on futures, and forward contracts, which have market and/or credit risk. Purchase and sale of futures contracts require margin deposits with the brokers. Additional deposits may be necessary for any loss on contract value. The Commodity Exchange Act requires a broker to segregate all customer transactions and assets from such broker’s proprietary activities. A customer’s cash and other property (for example, U.S. Treasury bills) deposited with a broker are considered commingled with all other customer funds subject to the broker’s segregation requirements. In the event of a broker’s insolvency, recovery may be limited to a pro rata share of segregated funds available. It is possible that the recovered amount could be less than total cash and other property deposited.
Market Risk: Market risk arises primarily from changes in the market value of financial instruments. Generally, the Partnership’s exposure is equal to the notional value of futures contracts purchased and unlimited on such contracts sold short. As both a buyer and seller of options on futures, the Partnership pays or receives a premium at the outset and then bears the risk of unfavorable market variations underlying the option. The risk of loss for purchased options on futures is limited to the premiums paid; written or sold options on futures expose the Partnership to potentially unlimited liability. Exposure to market risk is influenced by a number of factors, including the relationships between financial instruments, and the volatility and liquidity in the markets in which the financial instruments are traded. In many cases, the use of financial instruments may serve to modify or offset market risk associated with other transactions and, accordingly, may serve to decrease the Partnership’s overall exposure to market risk. The Partnership attempts to control its exposure to market risk through various analytical monitoring techniques.
Credit Risk: Credit risk arises primarily from the potential inability of counterparties to perform in accordance with the terms of a contract. The Partnership’s exposure to credit risk associated with counterparty nonperformance is limited to the current cost to replace all contracts in which the Partnership has a gain. Exchange-traded financial instruments generally does not give rise to significant counterparty exposure due to the case settlement procedures for daily market movements and the margin requirements of individual exchanges. The net unrealized gain on open futures contracts is comprised of the following:
Open contracts generally mature within three months; as of September 30, 2006, the latest maturity date for open futures contracts is December 2006.
Concentration of Credit Risk: The Partnership uses UBS Securities as clearing broker (“Clearing Broker”). In the event this Clearing Broker did not fulfill its obligation, the Partnership may be exposed to risk. This risk of default depends in part on the creditworthiness of these Clearing Broker. The Partnership attempts to minimize this credit risk by monitoring the creditworthiness of the Clearing Broker. The General Partner has established procedures to actively monitor market risk and minimize credit risk, although there can be no assurance that it will, in fact, succeed in doing so. The Limited Partners bear the risk of loss only to the extent of the market value of their respective investments and, in certain specific circumstances, distributions and redemptions received. The amount of required margin and good faith deposits with the Clearing Broker usually range from 9% to 17% of net asset value. As of December 31, 2006, the Partnership maintained broker cash balances of $810,882 to satisfy such requirements, which equals 94% of net asset value.
Note 5: Guarantees
In the normal course of business, the Partnership may enter into contracts and agreements that contain a variety of representations and warranties and which provide general indemnifications. The Partnership’s maximum exposure under these arrangements cannot be estimated. However, the Partnership believes that it is unlikely it will have to make material payments under these arrangements and has not recorded any contingent liability in the financial statements for such indemnifications.
Note 6: Reimbursement of Certain Continuing Offering Expenses
In December 2006, the General Partner elected to reimburse the Partnership in the amount of $52,071 for certain continuing offering expenses that had already been incurred by the Partnership throughout the year.
The General Partner did not make the decision to reimburse the Partnership until late December 2006. Prior to that point in time, the intention was to let the Partnership incur these expenses directly. During the prior 11 months of 2006 the Partnership paid for these expenses and they were reflected in both the 10-Qs filed for the Partnership and in all performance reporting. When it became clear that asset gathering for the Partnership was substantially below original expectation, the General Partner elected to reimburse the Partnership due to the large impact these expenses had on performance due to the Partnership’s small asset base.
The impact of this one-time reimbursement increased the December total return by 6.08% (from -0.56% to +5.53%) and the total return for the year ended December 31, 2006 by 5.42% (from -11.21% to -5.79%). For purposes of presentation within these financial statements, the reimbursement is shown as a separate income item and expenses are shown without the reimbursement.
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit Number
Description of Document
Page Number
31.01
Certification by Chief Executive Officer
E1
32.01
Certification by Chief Executive Officer
E2