ITEM 1. BUSINESS
General
We are a specialty finance company that invests primarily in leveraged loans and mezzanine debt issued by private U.S. middle-market companies, which we define as companies having annual EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) of $5 million and $50 million, both through direct lending and through participation in loan syndicates. Our investment objective is to generate current income and, to a lesser extent, capital appreciation from our investments. We are externally managed and advised by Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC, a New York-based investment firm affiliated with Saratoga Partners, a middle market private equity investment firm.
Our portfolio is comprised primarily of investments in leveraged loans (both first and second lien term loans) issued by middle market companies. Term loans are loans that do not allow the borrowers to repay all or a portion of the loans prior to maturity and then re-borrow such repaid amounts under the loan again. Leveraged loans are generally senior debt instruments that rank ahead of subordinated debt of the portfolio company. Leveraged loans also have the benefit of security interests on the assets of the portfolio company, which may rank ahead of, or be junior to, other security interests. We also purchase mezzanine debt and make equity investments in middle market companies. Mezzanine debt is typically unsecured and subordinated to senior debt of the portfolio company.
While our primary focus is to generate current income and capital appreciation from our debt and equity investments in middle market companies, we may invest up to 30.0% of the portfolio in opportunistic investments in order to seek to enhance returns to stockholders. Such investments may include investments in distressed debt, including securities of companies in bankruptcy, foreign debt, private equity, securities of public companies that are not thinly traded and structured finance vehicles such as collateralized loan obligation funds.
As of February 28, 2013, we had total assets of $174.4 million and investments in 28 portfolio companies and an additional investment in the subordinated notes in one collateralized loan obligation fund (“Saratoga CLO”) with a fair value of $25.5 million. The overall portfolio composition as of February 28, 2013 consisted of 54.0% of first lien term loans, 6.2% of second lien term loans, 15.0% of senior secured notes, 3.1% of unsecured notes, 16.5% of subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO and 5.2% of common equity. The weighted average yield on all of our debt investments, including our investment in the subordinated notes in Saratoga CLO, as of February 28, 2013, was approximately 14.0%. Approximately 90% of our first lien debt investments are fully collateralized by the portfolio company having an enterprise value or an investment having an asset coverage equal to or greater than the principal amount of the related debt investment. Our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO represents a first loss position in a portfolio that, at February 28, 2013, was composed of $383.3 million in aggregate principal amount of predominantly senior secured first lien term loans. A first loss position means that we will suffer the first economic losses if losses are incurred on loans held by the Saratoga CLO. This investment is subject to unique risks. See Part I, Item 1A.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. The risks set forth below are the principal risks with respect to the Company generally and with respect to business development companies, they may not be the only risks we face. If any of the following risks occur, our business and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected. If any of the risks occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In such case, our net asset value and the trading price of our common stock could decline.
Risks Related to Our Business and Structure
The current state of the economy and financial markets increases the likelihood of adverse effects on our financial position and results of operations.
The broader economic fundamentals of the United States economy remain uncertain. Unemployment levels remain elevated and other economic fundamentals remain depressed. In the event that the United States economic performance contracts, it is likely that the financial results of middle market companies, like those in which we invest, could experience deterioration or limited growth, which could ultimately lead to difficulty in meeting their debt service requirements and an increase in defaults. Consequently, we can provide no assurance that the performance of certain of our portfolio companies will not be negatively impacted by economic or other conditions, which could also have a negative impact on our future results.
Recent U.S. debt ceiling and budget deficit concerns, together with signs of deteriorating sovereign debt conditions in Europe, have increased the possibility of additional credit-rating downgrades and economic slowdowns. Although U.S. lawmakers passed legislation to raise the federal debt ceiling, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States from “AAA” to “AA+” in August 2011. The impact of this or any further downgrades to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating, or its perceived creditworthiness, and the impact of the current crisis in Europe with respect to the ability of certain European Union countries to continue to service their sovereign debt obligations is inherently unpredictable and could adversely effect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. There can be no assurance that governmental or other measures to aid economic recovery will be effective. These developments, and the government’s credit concerns in general, could cause interest rates and borrowing costs to rise, which may negatively impact our ability to access the debt markets on favorable terms. In addition, the decreased credit rating could create broader financial turmoil and uncertainty, which may weigh heavily on our stock price. Continued adverse economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Although we have been able to secure access to additional liquidity, the potential for volatility in the debt and in the equity capital markets provides no assurance that debt or equity capital will be available to us in the future on favorable terms, or at all.
We may be obligated to pay Saratoga Investment Advisors incentive fees even if we incur a net loss, or there is a decline in the value of our portfolio.
Saratoga Investment Advisors is entitled to incentive fees for each fiscal quarter in an amount equal to a percentage of the excess of our investment income for that quarter (before deducting incentive compensation, but net of operating expenses and certain other items) above a threshold return for that quarter. Our pre-incentive fee net investment income, for incentive compensation purposes, excludes realized and unrealized capital gains or losses that we may incur in the fiscal quarter, even if such capital gains or losses result in a net gain or loss on our statement of operations for that quarter. Thus, we may be required to pay Saratoga Investment Advisors incentive fees for a fiscal quarter even if there is a decline in the value of our portfolio or we incur a net loss for that quarter.
Under the terms of the investment advisory and management agreement, we may have to pay incentive fees to Saratoga Investment Advisors in connection with the sale of an investment that is sold at a price higher than the fair value of such investment on May 31, 2010, even if we incur a loss on the sale of such investment.
Incentive fees on capital gains paid to Saratoga Investment Advisors under the investment advisory and management agreement equals 20.0% of our “incentive fee capital gains,” which equals our realized capital gains on a cumulative basis from May 31, 2010 through the end of the year, if any, computed net of all realized capital losses and unrealized capital depreciation on a cumulative basis, less the aggregate amount of any previously paid capital gain incentive fee. Under the investment advisory and management agreement, the capital gains portion of the incentive fee is based on realized gains and realized and unrealized losses from May 31, 2010. Therefore, realized and unrealized losses incurred prior to such time will not be taken into account when calculating the capital gains portion of the incentive fee, and Saratoga Investment Advisors will be entitled to 20.0% of the incentive fee capital gains that arise after May 31, 2010. In addition, the cost basis for computing realized gains and losses on investments held by us as of May 31, 2010 will equal the fair value of such investments as of such date. See our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2010 that was filed with the SEC on July 15, 2010 for the fair value and other information related to our investments as of such date. As a result, we may be required to pay incentive fees to Saratoga Investment Advisors on the sale of an investment even if we incur a realized loss on such investment, so long as the investment is sold for an amount greater than its fair value as of May 31, 2010.
The way in which the base management and incentive fees under the investment advisory and management agreement is determined may encourage Saratoga Investment Advisors to take actions that may not be in our best interests.
The incentive fee payable by us to our investment adviser may create an incentive for it to make investments on our behalf that are risky or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during cyclical economic downturns. The way in which the incentive fee payable to our investment adviser is determined, which is calculated separately in two components as a percentage of the income (subject to a hurdle rate) and as a percentage of the realized gain on invested capital, may encourage our investment adviser to use leverage to increase the return on our investments or otherwise manipulate our income so as to recognize income in quarters where the hurdle rate is exceeded. Moreover, we pay Saratoga Investment Advisors a base management fee based on our total assets, including any investments made with borrowings, which may create an incentive for it to cause us to incur more leverage than is prudent, or not to repay our outstanding indebtedness when it may be advantageous for us to do so, in order to maximize its compensation. Under certain circumstances, the use of leverage may increase the likelihood of default, which would disfavor the holders of our securities.
The incentive fee payable by us to our investment adviser also may create an incentive for our investment adviser to invest on our behalf in instruments that have a deferred interest feature. Under these investments, we would accrue the interest over the life of the investment but would not receive the cash income from the investment until the end of the investment’s term, if at all. Our net investment income used to calculate the income portion of our incentive fee, however, includes accrued interest. Thus, a portion of the incentive fee would be based on income that we have not yet received in cash and may never receive in cash if the portfolio company is unable to satisfy such interest payment obligation to us. Consequently, while we may make incentive fee payments on income accruals that we may not collect in the future and with respect to which we do not have a “claw back” right against our investment adviser
per se, the amount of accrued income written off in any period will reduce the income in the period in which such write-off was taken and may thereby reduce such period’s incentive fee payment.
In addition, Saratoga Investment Advisors receives a quarterly income incentive fee based, in part, on our pre-incentive fee net investment income, if any, for the immediately preceding calendar quarter. This income incentive fee is subject to a fixed quarterly hurdle rate before providing an income incentive fee return to Saratoga Investment Advisors. This fixed hurdle rate was determined when then current interest rates were relatively low on a historical basis. Thus, if interest rates rise, it would become easier for our investment income to exceed the hurdle rate and, as a result, more likely that Saratoga Investment Advisors will receive an income incentive fee than if interest rates on our investments remained constant or decreased. In addition, if we repurchase our outstanding debt securities and such repurchase results in our recording a net gain on the extinguishment of debt for financial reporting and tax purposes, such net gain will be included in our pre-incentive fee net investment income for purposes of determining the income incentive fee payable to our investment adviser under the investment advisory and management agreement.
Moreover, our investment adviser receives the incentive fee based, in part, upon net capital gains realized on our investments. Unlike the portion of the incentive fee based on income, there is no performance threshold applicable to the portion of the incentive fee based on net capital gains. As a result, our investment adviser may have a tendency to invest more in investments that are likely to result in capital gains as compared to income producing securities. Such a practice could result in our investing in more speculative securities than would otherwise be the case, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during economic downturns.
Our board of directors will seek to ensure that Saratoga Investment Advisors is acting in our best interests and that any conflict of interest faced by Saratoga Investment Advisors in its capacity as our investment adviser does not negatively impact us.
The base management fee we pay to Saratoga Investment Advisors may cause it to increase our leverage contrary to our interest.
We pay Saratoga Investment Advisors a quarterly base management fee based on the value of our total assets (including any assets acquired with leverage). Accordingly, Saratoga Investment Advisors has an economic incentive to increase our leverage. Our board of directors monitors the conflicts presented by this compensation structure by approving the amount of leverage that we incur. If our leverage is increased, we will be exposed to increased risk of loss, bear the increase cost of issuing and servicing such senior indebtedness, and will be subject to any additional covenant restrictions imposed on us in an indenture or other instrument or by the applicable lender.
We employ leverage, which magnifies the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and may increase the risk of investing in us.
Borrowings, also known as leverage, magnify the potential for gain or loss on amounts invested and, therefore, increase the risks associated with investing in us. We borrow from and issue senior debt securities to banks and other lenders that is secured by a lien on our assets. Holders of these senior securities have fixed dollar claims on our assets that are superior to the claims of the holders of our securities, including the holders of our 7.50% Notes due 2020 (the “Notes”). Leverage is generally considered a speculative investment technique. Any increase in our income in excess of interest payable on our outstanding indebtedness would cause our net income to increase more than it would have had we not incurred leverage, while any decrease in our income would cause net income to decline more sharply than it would have had we not incurred leverage. Such a decline could negatively affect our ability to make common stock distributions or scheduled debt payments, including with respect to the Notes. There can be no assurance that our leveraging strategy will be successful.
As of May 22, 2013, there was no outstanding balance under the Credit Facility. As of May 22, 2013, we had issued $40.0 million SBA-guaranteed debentures and $48.3 millon of the Notes. We may incur additional indebtedness in the future, including up to an additional $45.0 million under the Credit Facility, although there can be no assurance that we will be successful in doing so. Our ability to service our debt depends largely on our financial performance and is subject to prevailing economic conditions and competitive pressures. The amount of leverage that we employ at any particular time will depend on our management’s and our Board of Directors’ assessment of market and other factors at the time of any proposed borrowing.
Our outstanding indebtedness imposes, and additional debt we may incur in the future will likely impose, financial and operating covenants that restrict our business activities, including limitations that could hinder our ability to finance additional loans and investments or to make the distributions required to maintain our status as a RIC. A failure to add new debt facilities or issue additional debt securities or other evidences of indebtedness in lieu of or in addition to existing indebtedness could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Saratoga Investment Advisors’ liability is limited under the investment advisory and management agreement and we will indemnify Saratoga Investments Advisors against certain liabilities, which may lead it to act in a riskier manner on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.
Saratoga Investment Advisors has not assumed any responsibility to us other than to render the services described in the investment advisory and management agreement. Pursuant to the investment advisory and management agreement, Saratoga Investment Advisors and its officers and employees are not liable to us for their acts under the investment advisory and management agreement absent willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard in the performance of their duties. We have agreed to indemnify, defend and protect Saratoga Investment Advisors and its officers and employees with respect to all damages, liabilities, costs and expenses resulting from acts of Saratoga Investment Advisors not arising out of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard in the performance of their duties under the investment advisory and management agreement. These protections may lead Saratoga Investment Advisors to act in a riskier manner when acting on our behalf than it would when acting for its own account.
Substantially all of our assets are subject to security interests under our Credit Facility or claims of the SBA with respect to SBA-guaranteed debentures we may issue and if we default on our obligations thereunder, we may suffer adverse consequences, including the foreclosure on our assets.
Substantially all of our assets are pledged as collateral under the Credit Facility or are subject to a superior claim over the holders of our common stock or the Notes by the SBA pursuant to the SBA-guaranteed debentures. If we default on our obligations under the Credit Facility or the SBA-guaranteed debentures, Madison Capital Funding and/or the SBA may have the right to foreclose upon and sell, or otherwise transfer, the collateral subject to their security interests or superior claim. In such event, we may be forced to sell our investments to raise funds to repay our outstanding borrowings in order to avoid foreclosure and these forced sales may be at times and at prices we would not consider advantageous. Moreover, such deleveraging of our company could significantly impair our ability to effectively operate our business in the manner in which we have historically operated.
In addition, if Madison Capital Funding exercises its right to sell the assets pledged under the Credit Facility, such sales may be completed at distressed sale prices, thereby diminishing or potentially eliminating the amount of cash available to us after repayment of the amounts outstanding under the Credit Facility.
We are exposed to risks associated with changes in interest rates including potential effects on our cost of capital and net investment income.
General interest rate fluctuations and changes in credit spreads on floating rate loans may have a substantial negative impact on our investments and investment opportunities and, accordingly, may have a material adverse effect on our rate of return on invested capital. In addition, an increase in interest rates would make it more expensive to use debt to finance our investments. Decreases in credit spreads on debt that pays a floating rate of return would have an impact on the income generation of our floating rate assets. Trading prices for debt that pays a fixed rate of return tend to fall as interest rates rise. Trading prices tend to fluctuate more for fixed rate securities that have longer maturities. Although we have no policy governing the maturities of our investments, under current market conditions we expect that we will invest in a portfolio of debt generally having maturities of up to ten years. This means that we will be subject to greater risk (other things being equal) than an entity investing solely in shorter-term securities.
Because we may borrow to fund our investments, a portion of our net investment income may be dependent upon the difference between the interest rate at which we borrow funds and the interest rate at which we invest these funds. A portion of our investments will have fixed interest rates, while a portion of our borrowings will likely have floating interest rates. As a result, a significant change in market interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our net investment income. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds could increase, which would reduce our net investment income. We may hedge against such interest rate fluctuations by using standard hedging instruments such as futures, options and forward contracts, subject to applicable legal requirements, including without limitation, all necessary registrations (or exemptions from registration) with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. These activities may limit our ability to participate in the benefits of lower interest rates with respect to the hedged borrowings. Adverse developments resulting from changes in interest rates or hedging transactions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
There are significant potential conflicts of interest which could adversely impact our investment returns.
Our executive officers and directors, and the members of our investment adviser, serve or may serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do or of investment funds managed by our affiliates. Accordingly, they may have obligations to investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which might not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. For example, Christian L. Oberbeck, our chief executive officer and managing member of our investment adviser, is the managing partner of Saratoga Partners, a middle market private equity investment firm. In addition, the principals of our investment adviser may manage other funds which may from time to time have overlapping investment objectives with those of us and accordingly invest in, whether principally or secondarily, asset classes similar to those targeted by us. If this should occur, the principals of our investment adviser will face conflicts of interest in the allocation of investment opportunities to us and such other funds. Although our investment professionals will endeavor to allocate investment opportunities in a fair and equitable manner, we and our common stockholders could be adversely affected in the event investment opportunities are allocated among us and other investment vehicles
managed or sponsored by, or affiliated with, our executive officers, directors and investment adviser, and the members of our investment adviser.
Changes in laws or regulations governing our operations, or changes in the interpretation thereof, and any failure by us to comply with laws or regulations governing our operations may adversely affect our business.
We are subject to regulation at the local, state and federal levels. These laws and regulations, as well as their interpretation, may be changed from time to time. Any change in these laws or regulations, or their interpretation, or any failure by us to comply with these laws or regulations may adversely affect our business.
Regulations governing our operation as a BDC will affect our ability to raise additional capital.
Our business requires a substantial amount of additional capital. We may acquire additional capital from the issuance of senior securities or other indebtedness or the issuance of additional shares of our common stock. However, we may not be able to raise additional capital in the future on favorable terms or at all. We may issue debt securities or preferred securities, which we refer to collectively as “senior securities,” and we may borrow money from banks or other financial institutions, up to the maximum amount permitted by the 1940 Act.
Under the provisions of the 1940 Act, we are permitted, as a BDC, to incur indebtedness or issue senior securities only in amounts such that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 200.0% after such incurrence or issuance. Our ability to issue different types of securities is also limited. Compliance with these requirements may unfavorably limit our investment opportunities and reduce our ability in comparison to other companies to profit from favorable spreads between the rates at which we can borrow and the rates at which we can lend. As a business development company, therefore, we may need to issue equity more frequently than our privately owned competitors, which may lead to greater stockholder dilution. With respect to certain types of senior securities, we must make provisions to prohibit any dividend distribution to our stockholders or the repurchase of certain of our securities, unless we meet the applicable asset coverage ratios at the time of the dividend distribution or repurchase. If the value of our assets declines, we may be unable to satisfy the asset coverage test. If that happens, we may be required to liquidate a portion of our investments and repay a portion of our indebtedness at a time when such sales may be disadvantageous in order to make dividend distributions or repurchase certain of our securities.
We are not generally able to issue and sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share. We may, however, sell our common stock, or warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below the current net asset value of the common stock if our board of directors determines that such sale is in our best interests and the best interests of our stockholders, and our stockholders approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price which, in the determination of our board of directors, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any commission or discount). If our common stock trades at a discount to net asset value, this restriction could adversely affect our ability to raise capital. At our 2012 annual meeting of stockholders, our stockholders approved a proposal that authorizes us to sell shares of our common stock below the then current net asset value per share of our common stock at an offering price per share that is not less than 85% of the then current net asset value per share in one or more offerings for a period of one year ending on the earlier of September 28, 2013 or the date of our 2013 annual meeting of stockholders. Continued access to this exception will require approval of similar proposals at future stockholder meetings. If our common stock trades at a discount to net asset value, this restriction could adversely affect our ability to raise capital.
Pending legislation may allow us to incur additional leverage.
As a business development company, we are generally not permitted to incur indebtedness unless immediately after such borrowing we have an asset coverage for total borrowings of at least 200% (i.e., the amount of debt may not exceed 50% of the value of our assets). We have agreed in the covenant in the indenture governing the Notes not to violate this section of the 1940 Act, whether or not we continue to be subject to such provision, but giving effect, in either case, to any exemptive relief granted to us by the SEC. Recent legislation introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, if passed, would modify this section of the 1940 Act and increase the amount of debt that business development companies may incur by modifying the percentage from 200% to 150%. As a result, we may be able to incur additional indebtedness in the future and therefore your risk of an investment in our securities may increase.
The agreement governing our Credit Facility contains various covenants that, among other things, limits our discretion in operating our business and provides for certain minimum financial covenants.
The agreement governing the Credit Facility contains customary default provisions such as the termination or departure of either Messrs. Oberbeck, Petrocelli or Grisius, a material adverse change in our business and the failure to maintain certain minimum loan quality and performance standards. An event of default under the facility would result, among other things, in termination of the availability of further funds under the facility
and an accelerated maturity date for all amounts outstanding under the facility, which would likely disrupt our business and, potentially, the portfolio companies whose loans we financed through the facility. This could reduce our revenues and, by delaying any cash payment allowed to us under the facility until the lender has been paid in full, reduce our liquidity and cash flow and impair our ability to grow our business and maintain our status as a RIC.
Each loan origination under the facility is subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. We cannot assure you that we will be able to borrow funds under the facility at any particular time or at all.
We will be subject to corporate-level income tax if we fail to qualify as a RIC.
We seek to maintain our qualification as a RIC under the Code, which requires us to qualify continuously as a BDC and meet certain source of income, distribution and asset diversification requirements.
The source of income requirement is satisfied if we derive at least 90.0% of our annual gross income from interest, dividends, payments with respect to certain securities loans, gains from the sale or other disposition of securities or options thereon or foreign currencies, or other income derived with respect to our business of investing in such securities or currencies, and net income from interests in “qualified publicly traded partnerships,” as defined in the Code.
The annual distribution requirement is satisfied if we distribute to our stockholders on an annual basis an amount equal to at least 90.0% of our ordinary net taxable income and realized net short-term capital gains in excess of realized net long-term capital losses, if any, reduced by deductible expenses. We are subject to certain asset coverage ratio requirements under the 1940 Act and covenants under our borrowing agreements that could, under certain circumstances, restrict us from making distributions necessary to qualify as a RIC. In such case, if we are unable to obtain cash from other sources, we may fail to qualify as a RIC and, thus, may be subject to corporate-level income tax.
The diversification requirements will be satisfied if we diversify our holdings so that at the end of each quarter of the taxable year: (i) at least 50.0% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities, securities of other regulated investment companies, and other securities if such other securities of any one issuer do not represent more than 5.0% of the value of our assets or more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of the issuer; and (ii) no more than 25.0% of the value of our assets is invested in the securities, other than U.S. government securities or securities of other regulated investment companies, of one issuer or of two or more issuers that are controlled, as determined under applicable tax rules, by us and that are engaged in the same or similar or related trades or businesses or in certain publicly traded partnerships.
Failure to meet these tests may result in our having to (i) dispose of certain investments quickly or (ii) raise additional capital to prevent the loss of our RIC qualification. Because most of our investments will be in private companies, any such dispositions could be made at disadvantageous prices and may result in substantial losses. If we raise additional capital to satisfy the asset diversification requirements, it could take us time to invest such capital. During this period, we will invest the additional capital in temporary investments, such as cash and cash equivalents, which we expect will earn yields substantially lower than the interest income that we anticipate receiving in respect of investments in leveraged loans and mezzanine debt.
If we fail to qualify as a RIC for any reason, all of our taxable income will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates. The resulting corporate taxes could substantially reduce our net assets, the amount of income available for distribution to our common stockholders or payment of our outstanding indebtedness including the Notes. Such a failure would have a material adverse effect on us and the holders of our securities.
Because we intend to distribute between 90% and 100% of our income to our stockholders in connection with our election to be treated as a RIC, we will continue to need additional capital to finance our growth. If additional funds are unavailable or not available on favorable terms, our ability to grow will be impaired.
In order to qualify for the tax benefits available to RICs and to minimize corporate-level taxes, we intend to distribute to our stockholders between 90% and 100% of our annual taxable income, except that we may retain certain net capital gains for investment, and treat such amounts as deemed distributions to our stockholders. If we elect to treat any amounts as deemed distributions, we must pay income taxes at the corporate rate on such deemed distributions on behalf of our stockholders. As a result of these requirements, we will likely need to raise capital from other sources to grow our business. As a BDC, we generally are required to meet a coverage ratio of total assets, less liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, to total senior securities, which includes all of our borrowings and any outstanding preferred stock, of at least 200%. These requirements limit the amount that we may borrow. Because we will continue to need capital to grow our investment portfolio, these limitations may prevent us from incurring debt and require us to raise additional equity at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so.
While we expect to be able to borrow and to issue additional debt and equity securities, we cannot assure you that debt and equity financing will be available to us on favorable terms, or at all. Also, as a BDC, we generally are not permitted to issue equity securities priced below net asset value without stockholder approval. If additional funds are not available to us, we could be forced to curtail or cease new investment activities, and our net asset value and share price could decline.
We may have difficulty paying our required distributions if we recognize income before or without receiving cash in respect of such income.
For federal income tax purposes, we may be required to recognize taxable income in circumstances in which we do not receive a corresponding payment in cash. For example, we may on occasion hold debt obligations that are treated under applicable tax rules as having original issue discount (such as debt instruments with payment-in-kind interest (“PIK”) or, in certain cases, increasing interest rates or issued with warrants) and we must include in income each year a portion of the original issue discount that accrues over the life of the obligation, regardless of whether cash representing such income is received by us in the same taxable year. We may also have to include in income other amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as deferred loan origination fees that are paid after origination of the loan or are paid in non-cash compensation such as warrants or stock. In addition, we may be required to accrue for federal income tax purposes amounts attributable to our investment in Saratoga CLO, a collateralized loan obligation fund, that may differ from the distributions paid in respect of our investment in the subordinated notes of such collateralized loan obligation fund because of the factors set forth above or because distributions on the subordinated notes are contractually required to be diverted for reinvestment or to pay down outstanding indebtedness.
Because any original issue discount or other amounts accrued will be included in our investment company taxable income for the year of accrual, we may be required to make a distribution to our stockholders in order to satisfy the annual distribution requirement, even though we will not have received any corresponding cash amount. As a result, we may have difficulty meeting the annual distribution requirement necessary to obtain and maintain RIC tax treatment under the Code. We may have to sell some of our investments at times and/or at prices we would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or forgo new investment opportunities for this purpose. If we are not able to obtain cash from other sources, we may fail to qualify for RIC tax treatment and thus become subject to corporate-level income tax.
Our ability to enter into transactions with our affiliates is restricted.
We are prohibited under the 1940 Act from participating in certain transactions with certain of our affiliates without the prior approval of the members of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. Any person that owns, directly or indirectly, 5.0% or more of our outstanding voting securities is our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any securities (other than our securities) from or to such affiliate, absent the prior approval of our independent directors. The 1940 Act also prohibits certain “joint” transactions with certain of our affiliates, which could include investments in the same portfolio company, without prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. If a person acquires more than 25.0% of our voting securities, we are prohibited from buying or selling any security (other than any security of which we are the issuer) from or to such person or certain of that person’s affiliates, or entering into prohibited joint transactions with such person, absent the prior
approval of the SEC. Similar restrictions limit our ability to transact business with our officers, directors or investment adviser or their affiliates. As a result of these restrictions, we may be prohibited from buying or selling any security (other than any security of which we are the issuer) from or to any portfolio company of a private equity fund managed by our investment adviser without the prior approval of the SEC, which may limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us.
We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities.
A number of entities compete with us to make the types of investments that we make in private middle market companies. We compete with other BDCs, public and private funds (including SBICs), commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies, insurance companies, high-yield investors, hedge funds, and, to the extent they provide an alternative form of financing, private equity funds. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than us. Some competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments that could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and establish more relationships than us. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a BDC. As a result of this competition, we may not be able to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities from time to time, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to identify and make investments that meet our investment objective.
We do not seek to compete primarily based on the interest rates we offer and we believe that some of our competitors may make loans with interest rates that are comparable to or lower than the rates we offer.
We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure. If we match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure, we may experience decreased net interest income and increased risk of credit loss. As a result of operating in such a competitive environment, we may make investments that are on better terms to our portfolio companies than we originally anticipated, which may impact our return on these investments.
Economic recessions or downturns could impair our portfolio companies and harm our operating results.
Many of our portfolio companies may be susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions and may be unable to repay our debt investments during these periods. Therefore, our non-performing assets are likely to increase and the value of our portfolio is likely to decrease during these periods. Adverse economic conditions also may decrease the value of collateral securing some of our debt investments and the value of our equity investments. Economic slowdowns or recessions could lead to financial losses in our portfolio and a decrease in revenues, net income and assets. Unfavorable economic conditions also could increase our funding costs, limit our access to the capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us. These events could prevent us from increasing investments and harm our operating results.
We are a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, and therefore we are not limited with respect to the proportion of our assets that may be invested in securities of a single issuer.
We are classified as a non-diversified investment company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, which means that we are not limited by the 1940 Act with respect to the proportion of our assets that we may invest in securities of a single issuer. Although we seek to maintain a diversified portfolio in accordance with our business strategies, to the extent that we assume large positions in the securities of a small number of issuers, our net asset value may fluctuate to a greater extent than that of a diversified investment company as a result of changes in the financial condition or the market’s assessment of the issuer. We may also be more susceptible to any single economic or regulatory occurrence than a diversified investment company. Beyond our RIC asset diversification requirements, we do not have fixed guidelines for diversification, and our investments could be concentrated in relatively few portfolio companies.
Our financial condition and results of operation depend on our ability to manage future investments effectively.
Our ability to achieve our investment objective depends on our ability to acquire suitable investments and monitor and administer those investments, which depends, in turn, on Saratoga Investment Advisors’ ability to identify, invest in and monitor companies that meet our investment criteria.
Accomplishing this result on a cost-effective basis is largely a function of Saratoga Investment Advisors’ structuring of the investment process and its ability to provide competent, attentive and efficient service to us. Our executive officers and the officers and employees of Saratoga Investment Advisors have substantial responsibilities in connection with their roles at Saratoga Partners as well as responsibilities under the investment advisory and management agreement. They may also be called upon to provide managerial
assistance to our portfolio companies. These demands on their time, which will increase as the number of investments grow, may distract them or slow the rate of investment. In order to grow, Saratoga Investment Advisors may need to hire, train, supervise and manage new employees. However, we cannot assure you that any such employees will contribute to the work of Saratoga Investment Advisors. Any failure to manage our future growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.
We may experience fluctuations in our quarterly results.
We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results due to a number of factors, including the interest rate payable on the debt investments we make, the default rate on such investments, the level of our expenses, variations in and the timing of the recognition of realized and unrealized gains or losses, the degree to which we encounter competition in our markets and general economic conditions. As a result of these factors, results for any period should not be relied upon as being indicative of performance in future periods.
Substantially all of our portfolio investments are recorded at fair value as approved in good faith by our board of directors; such valuations are inherently uncertain and may be materially higher or lower than the values that we ultimately realize upon the disposal of such investments.
Substantially all of our portfolio is, and we expect will continue to be, comprised of investments that are not publicly traded. The value of investments that are not publicly traded may not be readily determinable. We value these investments quarterly at fair value as approved in good faith by our board of directors. Where appropriate, Saratoga Investment Advisers may utilize the services of an independent valuation firm to aid it in determining fair value. The types of factors that may be considered in valuing our investments include the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments and its earnings, the markets in which the portfolio company does business, market yield trend analysis, comparison to publicly traded companies, discounted cash flow and other relevant factors. Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private investments and private companies, are inherently uncertain, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value may differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these investments existed. Our net asset value could be materially affected if the determinations regarding the fair value of our investments were materially higher or lower than the values that we ultimately realize upon the disposal of such investments.
If we make unsecured debt investments, we may lack adequate protection in the event our portfolio companies become distressed or insolvent and will likely experience a lower recovery than more senior debtholders in the event our portfolio companies defaults on their indebtedness.
We make unsecured debt investments in portfolio companies. Unsecured debt investments are unsecured and junior to other indebtedness of the portfolio company. As a consequence, the holder of an unsecured debt investment may lack adequate protection in the event the portfolio company becomes distressed or insolvent and will likely experience a lower recovery than more senior debtholders in the event the portfolio company defaults on its indebtedness. In addition, unsecured debt investments of middle-market companies are often highly illiquid and in adverse market conditions may experience steep declines in valuation even if they are fully performing.
If we invest in the securities and other obligations of distressed or bankrupt companies, such investments may be subject to significant risks, including lack of income, extraordinary expenses, uncertainty with respect to satisfaction of debt, lower-than expected investment values or income potentials and resale restrictions.
We are authorized to invest in the securities and other obligations of distressed or bankrupt companies. At times, distressed debt obligations may not produce income and may require us to bear certain extraordinary expenses (including legal, accounting, valuation and transaction expenses) in order to protect and recover our investment. Therefore, to the extent we invest in distressed debt, our ability to achieve current income may be diminished which may affect our ability to make distributions on our common stock or make interest and principal payments of the Notes.
We also will be subject to significant uncertainty as to when and in what manner and for what value the distressed debt we invest in will eventually be satisfied (e.g., through a liquidation of the obligor’s assets, an exchange offer or plan of reorganization involving the distressed debt securities or a payment of some amount in satisfaction of the obligation). In addition, even if an exchange offer is made or plan of reorganization is adopted with respect to distressed debt held by us, there can be no assurance that the securities or other assets received by us in connection with such exchange offer or plan of reorganization will not have a lower value or income potential than may have been anticipated when the investment was made.
Moreover, any securities received by us upon completion of an exchange offer or plan of reorganization may be restricted as to resale. As a result of our participation in negotiations with respect to any exchange offer or plan of reorganization with respect to an issuer of distressed debt, we may be restricted from disposing of such securities if we are in possession of material non-public information relating to the issuer.
Second priority liens on collateral securing loans that we make to our portfolio companies may be subject to control by senior creditors with first priority liens. If there is a default, the value of the collateral may not be sufficient to repay in full both the first priority creditors and us.
Certain loans that we make to portfolio companies will be secured on a second priority basis by the same collateral securing senior secured debt of such companies. The first priority liens on the collateral will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under any outstanding senior debt and may secure certain other future debt that may be permitted to be incurred by the company under the agreements governing the loans. The holders of obligations secured by the first priority liens on the collateral will generally control the liquidation of and be entitled to receive proceeds from any realization of the collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of the collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from the sale or sales of all of the collateral would be sufficient to satisfy the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens after payment in full of all obligations secured by the first priority liens on the collateral. If such proceeds are not sufficient to repay amounts outstanding under the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens, then we, to the extent not repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the collateral, will only have an unsecured claim against the company’s remaining assets, if any.
The rights we may have with respect to the collateral securing the loans we make to our portfolio companies with senior debt outstanding may also be limited pursuant to the terms of one or more intercreditor agreements that we enter into with the holders of senior debt. Under such an intercreditor agreement, at any time that obligations that have the benefit of the first priority liens are outstanding, any of the following actions that may be taken with respect to the collateral will be at the direction of the holders of the obligations secured by the first priority liens: the ability to cause the commencement of enforcement proceedings against the collateral; the ability to control the conduct of such proceedings; the approval of amendments to collateral documents; releases of liens on the collateral; and waivers of past defaults under collateral documents. We may not have the ability to control or direct such actions, even if our rights are adversely affected.
The lack of liquidity in our investments may adversely affect our business.
We primarily make investments in private companies. A portion of these securities may be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale, transfer, pledge or other disposition or will otherwise be less liquid than publicly traded securities. The illiquidity of our investments may make it difficult for us to sell such investments if the need arises. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we have previously recorded our investments. In addition, we may face other restrictions on our ability to liquidate an investment in a business entity to the extent that we or our investment adviser has or could be deemed to have material non-public information regarding such business entity.
The debt securities in which we invest are subject to credit risk and prepayment risk.
An issuer of a debt security may be unable to make interest payments and repay principal. We could lose money if the issuer of a debt obligation is, or is perceived to be, unable or unwilling to make timely principal and/or interest payments, or to otherwise honor its obligations. The downgrade of a security by rating agencies may further decrease its value.
Certain debt instruments may contain call or redemption provisions which would allow the issuer thereof to prepay principal prior to the debt instrument’s stated maturity. This is known as prepayment risk. Prepayment risk is greater during a falling interest rate environment as issuers can reduce their cost of capital by refinancing higher interest debt instruments with lower interest debt instruments. An issuer may also elect to refinance their debt instruments with lower interest debt instruments if the credit standing of the issuer improves. To the extent debt securities in our portfolio are called or redeemed, we may receive less than we paid for such security and we may be forced to reinvest in lower yielding securities or debt securities of issuers of lower credit quality.
Uncertainty relating to the LIBOR calculation process may adversely affect the value of our portfolio of the LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt securities.
Concerns have been publicized that some of the member banks surveyed by the British Bankers’ Association (“BBA”) in connection with the calculation of LIBOR across a range of maturities and currencies may have been under-reporting or otherwise manipulating the inter-bank lending rate applicable to them in order to profit on their derivatives positions or to avoid an appearance of capital insufficiency or adverse reputational or other consequences that may have resulted from reporting inter-bank lending rates higher than those they actually submitted. A number of BBA member banks have entered into settlements with their regulators and law enforcement agencies with respect to alleged manipulation of LIBOR, and investigations by regulators and governmental authorities in various jurisdictions are ongoing.
Actions by the BBA, regulators or law enforcement agencies may result in changes to the manner in which LIBOR is determined. Uncertainty as to the nature of such potential changes may adversely affect the market for LIBOR-based securities, including our portfolio of LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt securities. In addition, any further changes or reforms to the determination or supervision of LIBOR may result in a sudden or prolonged increase or decrease in reported LIBOR, which could have an adverse impact on the market for LIBOR-based securities or the value of our portfolio of LIBOR-indexed, floating-rate debt securities.
Our investment in Saratoga CLO constitutes a leveraged investment in a portfolio of predominantly senior secured first lien term loans and is subject to additional risks and volatility.
At February 28, 2013, our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO, a collateralized loan obligation fund, had a fair value of $25.5 million and constituted 16.5% of our portfolio. This investment constitutes a first loss position in a portfolio that, as of February 28, 2013, was composed of $383.3 million in aggregate principal amount of primarily senior secured first lien term loans and $28.8 million in uninvested cash. A first loss position means that we will suffer the first economic losses if the value of Saratoga CLO decreases. First loss positions typically carry a higher risk and earn a higher yield. Interest payments generated from this portfolio will be used to pay the administrative expenses of Saratoga CLO and interest on the debt issued by Saratoga CLO before paying a return on the subordinated notes. Principal payments will be similarly applied to pay administrative expenses of Saratoga CLO and for reinvestment or repayment of Saratoga CLO debt before paying a return on, or repayment of, the subordinated notes. In addition, 80.0% of our fixed management fee and 100.0% our incentive management fee for acting as the collateral manager of Saratoga CLO is subordinated to the payment of interest and principal on Saratoga CLO debt. Any losses on the portfolio will accordingly reduce the cash flow available to pay these management fees and provide a return on, or repayment of, our investment. Depending on the amount and timing of such losses, we may experience smaller than expected returns and, potentially, the loss of our entire investment.
As the manager of the portfolio of Saratoga CLO we will have some ability to direct the composition of the portfolio, but our discretion is limited by the terms of the debt issued by Saratoga CLO which may limit our ability to make investments that we feel are in the best interests of the subordinated notes, and the availability of suitable investments. The performance of the portfolio is also subject to many of the same risks sets forth in this Annual Report with respect to portfolio investments in leveraged loans.
Available information about privately held companies is limited.
We invest primarily in privately-held companies. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, and we are required to rely on the ability of our investment adviser’s investment professionals to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential returns from investing in these companies. These companies and their financial information are not subject to the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002 and other rules that govern public companies. If we are unable to uncover all material information about these companies, we may not make a fully informed investment decision, and we may lose money on our investments.
When we are a debt or minority equity investor in a portfolio company, we may not be in a position to control the entity, and its management may make decisions that could decrease the value of our investment.
We make both debt and minority equity investments; therefore, we are subject to the risk that a portfolio company may make business decisions with which we disagree, and the stockholders and management of such company may take risks or otherwise act in ways that do not serve our interests. As a result, a portfolio company may make decisions that could decrease the value of our portfolio holdings.
Our portfolio companies may incur debt or issue equity securities that rank equally with, or senior to, our investments in such companies.
Our portfolio companies usually will have, or may be permitted to incur, other debt, or issue other equity securities that rank equally with, or senior to, our investments. By their terms, such instruments may provide that the holders are entitled to receive payment of dividends, interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments in respect of our investments. These debt instruments will usually prohibit the portfolio companies from paying interest on or repaying our investments in the event and during the continuance of a default under such debt. Also, in the event of insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of securities ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution in respect of our investment. After repaying such holders, the portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for repaying its obligation to us. In the case of debtor ranking equally with our investments, we would have to share on an equal basis any distributions with other holders in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company.
There may be circumstances where our debt investments could be subordinated to claims of other creditors or we could be subject to lender liability claims.
If one of our portfolio companies were to go bankrupt, even though we may have structured our interest as senior debt, depending on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which we actually provided managerial assistance to that portfolio company, a bankruptcy court might re-characterize our debt holding and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to that of other creditors. In addition, lenders can be subject to lender liability claims for actions taken by them where they become too involved in the borrower’s business or exercise control over the borrower. It is possible that we could become subject to a lender’s liability claim, including as a result of actions taken if we actually render significant managerial assistance.
Investments in equity securities involve a substantial degree of risk.
We purchase common stock and other equity securities. Although equity securities have historically generated higher average total returns than fixed-income securities over the long-term, equity securities also have experienced significantly more volatility in those returns and in recent years have significantly under performed relative to fixed-income securities. The equity securities we acquire may fail to appreciate and may decline in value or become worthless and our ability to recover our investment will depend on our portfolio company’s success. Investments in equity securities involve a number of significant risks, including:
· any equity investment we make in a portfolio company could be subject to further dilution as a result of the issuance of additional equity interests and to serious risks as a junior security that will be subordinate to all indebtedness or senior securities in the event that the issuer is unable to meet its obligations or becomes subject to a bankruptcy process;
· to the extent that the portfolio company requires additional capital and is unable to obtain it, we may not recover our investment in equity securities; and
· in some cases, equity securities in which we invest will not pay current dividends, and our ability to realize a return on our investment, as well as to recover our investment, will be dependent on the success of our portfolio companies. Even if the portfolio companies are successful, our ability to realize the value of our investment may be dependent on the occurrence of a liquidity event, such as a public offering or the sale of the portfolio company. It is likely to take a significant amount of time before a liquidity event occurs or we can sell our equity investments. In addition, the equity securities we receive or invest in may be subject to restrictions on resale during periods in which it could be advantageous to sell.
There are special risks associated with investing in preferred securities, including:
· preferred securities may include provisions that permit the issuer, at its discretion, to defer distributions for a stated period without any adverse consequences to the issuer. If we own a preferred security that is deferring its distributions, we may be required to report income for tax purposes even though we have not received any cash payments in respect of such income;
· preferred securities are subordinated with respect to corporate income and liquidation payments, and are therefore subject to greater risk than debt;
· preferred securities may be substantially less liquid than many other securities, such as common securities or U.S. government securities; and
· preferred security holders generally have no voting rights with respect to the issuing company, subject to limited exceptions.
Our investments in foreign debt, including that of emerging market issuers, may involve significant risks in addition to the risks inherent in U.S. investments.
Although there are limitations on our ability to invest in foreign debt, we may, from time to time, invest in debt of foreign companies, including the debt of emerging market issuers. Investing in foreign companies may expose us to additional risks not typically associated with investing in U.S. companies. These risks include changes in exchange control regulations, political and social instability, expropriation, imposition of foreign taxes, less liquid markets and less available information than is generally the case in the United States, higher transaction costs, less government supervision of exchanges, brokers and issuers, less developed bankruptcy laws, difficulty in enforcing contractual obligations, lack of uniform accounting and auditing standards and greater price volatility. Investments in the debt of emerging market issuers may subject us to additional risks such as inflation, wage and price controls, and the imposition of trade barriers. Furthermore, economic conditions in emerging market countries are, to some extent, influenced by economic and securities market conditions in other emerging market countries. Although economic conditions are different in each country, investors’ reaction to developments in one country can have effects on the debt of issuers in other countries.
Although most of our investments will be U.S. dollar-denominated, our investments that are denominated in a foreign currency will be subject to the risk that the value of a particular currency will change in relation to one or more other currencies. Among the factors that may affect currency values are trade balances, the level of short-term interest rates, differences in relative values of similar assets in different currencies, long-term opportunities for investment and capital appreciation, and political developments. We may employ hedging techniques to minimize these risks, but we cannot assure you that we will fully hedge against these risks or that such strategies will be effective.
We may expose ourselves to risks if we engage in hedging transactions.
We may utilize instruments such as forward contracts, currency options and interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors to seek to hedge against fluctuations in the relative values of our portfolio positions from changes in currency exchange rates and market interest rates. Use of these hedging instruments may expose us to counter-party credit risk. Hedging against a decline in the values of our portfolio positions does not eliminate the possibility of fluctuations in the values of such positions or prevent losses if the values of such positions decline. However, such hedging can establish other positions designed to gain from those same developments, thereby offsetting the decline in the value of such portfolio positions. Such hedging transactions may also limit the opportunity for gain if the values of the portfolio positions should increase. Moreover, it may not be possible to hedge against an exchange rate or interest rate fluctuation that is generally anticipated at an acceptable price.
Our board of directors may change our investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice or stockholder approval, the effects of which may be adverse.
Our board of directors has the authority to modify or waive our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current operating policies and strategies would have on our business, financial condition, and value of our common stock. However, the effects might be adverse, which could negatively impact our ability to pay dividends and cause you to lose all or part of your investment.
We have no prior experience managing an SBIC and any failure to comply with SBA regulations, resulting from our lack of experience or otherwise, could have an adverse effect on our operations.
On March 28, 2012, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Saratoga Investment Corp. SBIC, LP, received a license from the SBA to operate as an SBIC under Section 301(c) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 and is regulated by the SBA.
The SBA places certain limitations on the financing terms of investments by SBICs in portfolio companies and prohibits SBICs from providing funds for certain purposes or to businesses in a few prohibited industries. Compliance with SBIC requirements may cause our SBIC subsidiary to forego attractive investment opportunities that are not permitted under SBA regulations.
Further, SBA regulations require that an SBIC be periodically examined and audited by the SBA to determine its compliance with the relevant SBA regulations. The SBA prohibits, without prior SBA approval, a “change of control” of an SBIC or transfers that would result in any person (or a group of persons acting in concert) owning 10% or more of a class of capital stock of an SBIC. If our SBIC subsidiary fails to comply with applicable SBA regulations, the SBA could, depending on the severity of the violation, limit or prohibit its use of debentures, declare outstanding debentures immediately due and payable, and/or limit it from making new investments. In addition, the SBA can revoke or suspend a license for willful or repeated violation of, or willful or repeated failure to observe, any provision of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 or any rule or regulation promulgated thereunder. These actions by the SBA would, in turn, negatively affect us because our SBIC subsidiary is our wholly-owned subsidiary. We do not have any prior experience managing an SBIC. Our lack of experience in complying with SBA regulations may hinder our ability to take advantage of our SBIC subsidiary’s access to SBA-guaranteed debentures.
Any failure to comply with SBA regulations could have an adverse effect on our operations.
Our investments may be risky, and you could lose all or part of your investment.
Substantially all of our debt investments hold a non-investment grade rating by one or more rating agencies or, where not rated by any rating agency, would be below investment grade, if rated. A below investment grade rating means that, in the rating agency’s view, there is an increased risk that the obligor on such debt will be unable to pay interest and repay principal on its debt in full. We also invest in debt that defers or pays PIK interest. To the extent interest payments associated with such debt are deferred, such debt will be subject to greater fluctuations in value based on changes in interest rates, such debt could produce taxable income without a corresponding cash payment to us, and since we generally do not receive any cash prior to maturity of the debt, the investment will be of greater risk.
In addition, private middle market companies in which we invest are exposed to a number of significant risks, including:
· limited financial resources and an inability to meet their obligations, which may be accompanied by a deterioration in the value of any collateral and a reduction in the likelihood of us realizing any guarantees we may have obtained in connection with our investment;
· shorter operating histories, narrower product lines and smaller market shares than larger businesses, which tend to render them more vulnerable to competitors’ actions and market conditions, as well as general economic downturns;
· dependence on the management talents and efforts of a small group of persons; the death, disability, resignation or termination of one or more of which could have a material adverse impact on the company and, in turn, on us;
· less predictable operating results and, possibly, substantial additional capital requirements to support their operations, finance expansion or maintain their competitive position; and
· difficulty accessing the capital markets to meet future capital needs.
In addition, our executive officers, directors and our investment adviser may, in the ordinary course of business, be named as defendants in litigation arising from our investments in the portfolio companies.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
Investing in our common stock may involve an above average degree of risk.
The investments we make in accordance with our investment objective may result in a higher amount of risk than alternative investment options and volatility or loss of principal. Our investments in portfolio companies may be highly speculative and aggressive, and therefore, an investment in our common stock may not be suitable for someone with lower risk tolerance.
We may in the future choose to pay dividends in our own stock, in which case you may be required to pay tax in excess of the cash you receive.
We may distribute taxable dividends that are payable in part in our stock. For example, on November 9, 2012, our board of directors declared a dividend of $4.25 per share to shareholders payable in cash or shares of our common stock. Under certain applicable provisions of the Code and the Treasury regulations, distributions payable in cash or in shares of stock at the election of stockholders are treated as taxable dividends. The Internal Revenue Service has issued private rulings indicating that this rule will apply even where the total amount of cash that may be distributed is limited to no more than 20.0% of the total distribution. Under these rulings, if too many stockholders elect to receive their distributions in cash, each such stockholder would receive a pro rata share of the total cash to be distributed and would receive the remainder of their distribution in shares of stock. If we decide to make any distributions consistent with these rulings that are payable in part in our stock, taxable stockholders receiving such dividends will be required to include the full amount of the dividend (whether received in cash, our stock, or a combination thereof) as ordinary income (or as long-term capital gain to the extent such distribution is properly reported as a capital gain dividend) to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits for United States federal income tax purposes. As a result, a U.S. stockholder may be required to pay tax with respect to such dividends in excess of any cash received. If a U.S. stockholder sells the stock it receives as a dividend in order to pay this tax, the sales proceeds may be less than the amount included in income with respect to the dividend, depending on the market price of our stock at the time of the sale. Furthermore, with respect to non-U.S. stockholders, we may be required to withhold U.S. tax with respect to such dividends, including in respect of all or a portion of such dividend that is payable in stock. In addition, if a significant number of our stockholders determine to sell shares of our stock in order to pay taxes owed on dividends, it may put downward pressure on the trading price of our stock.
The market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly.
The market price and liquidity of the market for our common stock may be significantly affected by numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control and may not be directly related to our operating performance. These factors include:
· significant volatility in the market price and trading volume of securities of BDCs or other companies in our sector, which are not necessarily related to the operating performance of these companies;
· changes in regulatory policies, accounting pronouncements or tax rules, particularly with respect to RICs, BDCs or SBICs;
· loss of RIC qualification;
· changes in the value of our portfolio of investments;
· any shortfall in revenue or net income or any increase in losses from levels expected by investors or securities analysts;
· departure of any of Saratoga Investment Advisors’ key personnel;
· operating performance of companies comparable to us;
· general economic trends and other external factors; and
· loss of a major funding source.
There is a risk that you may not receive distributions or that our distributions may not grow over time.
As a BDC for 1940 Act purposes and a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we intend to make distributions out of assets legally available for distribution to our stockholders once such distributions are authorized by our board of directors and declared by us. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions. In addition, due to the asset coverage test that is applicable to us as a BDC, and provisions contained in the agreements governing our borrowings, we may be limited in our ability to make distributions. Further, if we invest a greater amount of assets in equity securities that do not pay current dividends, it could reduce the amount available for distribution.
Provisions of our governing documents and the Maryland General Corporation Law could deter future takeover attempts and have an adverse impact on the price of our common stock.
We are governed by our charter and bylaws, which we refer to as our “governing documents.”
Our governing documents and the Maryland General Corporation Law contain provisions that may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a future transaction or change in control of us that might involve a premium price for our stockholders or otherwise be in their best interest.
Our charter provides for the classification of our board of directors into three classes of directors, serving staggered three-year terms, which may render a change of control of us or removal of our incumbent management more difficult. Furthermore, any and all vacancies on our board of directors will be filled generally only by the affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining directors in office, even if the remaining directors do not constitute a quorum, and any director elected to fill a vacancy will serve for the remainder of the full term until a successor is elected and qualifies.
Our board of directors is authorized to create and issue new series of shares, to classify or reclassify any unissued shares of stock into one or more classes or series, including preferred stock and, without stockholder approval, to amend our charter to increase or decrease the number of shares of stock that we have authority to issue, which could have the effect of diluting a stockholder’s ownership interest. Prior to the issuance of shares of stock of each class or series, including any reclassified series, our board of directors is required by our governing documents to set the terms, preferences, conversion or other rights, voting powers, restrictions, limitations as to dividends or other distributions, qualifications and terms or conditions of redemption for each class or series of shares of stock.
Our governing documents also provide that our board of directors has the exclusive power to adopt, alter or repeal any provision of our bylaws, and to make new bylaws. The Maryland General Corporation Law also contains certain provisions that may limit the ability of a third party to acquire control of us, such as:
· The Maryland Business Combination Act, which, subject to certain limitations, prohibits certain business combinations between us and an “interested stockholder” (defined generally as any person who beneficially owns 10% or more of the voting power of the common stock or an affiliate thereof) for five years after the most recent date on which the stockholder becomes an interested stockholder and, thereafter, imposes special minimum price provisions and special stockholder voting requirements on these combinations; and
· The Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act, which provides that “control shares” of a Maryland corporation (defined as shares of common stock which, when aggregated with other shares of common stock controlled by the stockholder, entitles the stockholder to exercise one of three increasing ranges of voting power in electing directors) acquired in a “control share acquisition” (defined as the direct or indirect acquisition of ownership or control of “control shares”) have no voting rights except to the extent approved by stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, excluding all interested shares of common stock.
The provisions of the Maryland Business Combination Act will not apply, however, if our board of directors adopts a resolution that any business combination between us and any other person will be exempt from the provisions of the Maryland Business Combination Act. Although our board of directors has adopted such a resolution, there can be no assurance that this resolution will not be altered or repealed in whole or in part at any time. If the resolution is altered or repealed, the provisions of the Maryland Business Combination Act may discourage others from trying to acquire control of us.
As permitted by Maryland law, our bylaws contain a provision exempting from the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act any and all acquisitions by any person of our common stock. Although our bylaws include such a provision, such a provision may also
be amended or eliminated by our board of directors at any time in the future, subject to obtaining confirmation from the SEC that it does not object to us being subject to the Maryland Control Share Acquisition Act.
Our common stock may trade at a discount to our net asset value per share.
Common stock of BDCs, as closed-end investment companies, frequently trade at a discount to net asset value. Our common stock has traded at a discount to our net asset value since shortly after our initial public offering. The risk that our common stock may continue to trade at a discount to our net asset value is separate and distinct from the risk that our net asset value per share may decline.
Stockholders may incur dilution if we sell shares of our common stock in one or more offerings at prices below the then current net asset value per share of our common stock.
The 1940 Act prohibits us from selling shares of our common stock at a price below the current net asset value per share of such stock, with certain exceptions. One such exception is prior stockholder approval of issuances below net asset value provided that our board of directors makes certain determinations. At our 2012 annual meeting of stockholders, our stockholders approved a proposal that authorizes us to sell shares of our common stock below the then current net asset value per share of our common stock in one or more offerings for a period of one year ending on the earlier of September 28, 2013 or the date of our 2013 annual meeting of stockholders. Our board of directors adopted a policy that requires us to sell or issue shares of our common stock at an offering price per share that is not less than 85.0% of the then current net asset value per share pursuant to this proposal. No change can be made to this policy without unanimous approval of our independent directors. Continued access to this exception will require approval of similar proposals at future stockholder meetings.
If we were to sell shares of our common stock below net asset value per share, such sales would result in an immediate dilution to the net asset value per share. This dilution would occur as a result of the sale of shares at a price below the then current net asset value per share of our common stock and a proportionately greater decrease in a stockholder’s interest in our earnings and assets and voting interest in us than the increase in our assets resulting from such issuance.
Because the number of shares of common stock that could be so issued and the timing of any issuance is not currently known, the actual dilutive effect cannot be predicted.
Risks Related to Our Notes
The Notes are unsecured and therefore are effectively subordinated to any secured indebtedness we have currently incurred or may incur in the future.
The Notes are not secured by any of our assets or any of the assets of our subsidiaries, including our wholly owned subsidiaries. As a result, the Notes are effectively subordinated to any secured indebtedness we or they have currently incurred and may incur in the future (or any indebtedness that is initially unsecured to which we subsequently grant security) to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness, including indebtedness under the Credit Facility. In any liquidation, dissolution, bankruptcy or other similar proceeding, the holders of any of our existing or future secured indebtedness and the secured indebtedness of our subsidiaries may assert rights against the assets pledged to secure that indebtedness in order to receive full payment of their indebtedness before the assets may be used to pay other creditors, including the holders of the Notes. As of May 22, 2013, there was no outstanding balance under the Credit Facility and we had the ability to borrow up to $45.0 million under the Credit Facility, subject to certain conditions. As of May 22, 2013, we had $40.0 million in SBA-guaranteed debentures outstanding. The indebtedness under the Credit Facility and to SBA-guaranteed debentures is senior to the Notes to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness.
The Notes are structurally subordinated to the indebtedness and other liabilities of our subsidiaries.
The Notes are obligations exclusively of Saratoga Investment Corp., and not of any of our subsidiaries. None of our subsidiaries is a guarantor of the Notes and the Notes are not required to be guaranteed by any subsidiary we may acquire or create in the future. Any assets of our subsidiaries are not directly available to satisfy the claims of our creditors, including holders of the Notes. Except to the extent we are a creditor with recognized claims against our subsidiaries, all claims of creditors of our subsidiaries will have priority over our equity interests in such entities (and therefore the claims of our creditors, including holders of the Notes) with respect to the assets of such entities. Even if we are recognized as a creditor of one or more of these entities, our claims would still be effectively subordinated to any security interests in the assets of any such entity and to any indebtedness or other liabilities of any such entity senior to our claims. Consequently, the Notes are structurally subordinated to all indebtedness and other liabilities of any of our subsidiaries and portfolio companies with respect to which we hold equity investments. In addition, our subsidiaries and these entities may incur substantial indebtedness in the future, all of which would be structurally senior to the Notes.
The indenture under which the Notes are issued contains limited protection for holders of the Notes.
The indenture under which the Notes are issued offers limited protection to holders of the Notes. The terms of the indenture and the Notes do not restrict our or any of our subsidiaries’ ability to engage in, or otherwise be a party to, a variety of corporate transactions, circumstances or events that could have a material adverse impact on your investment in the Notes. In particular, the terms of the indenture and the Notes do not place any restrictions on our or our subsidiaries’ ability to:
· issue securities or otherwise incur additional indebtedness or other obligations, including (1) any indebtedness or other obligations that would be equal in right of payment to the Notes, (2) any indebtedness or other obligations that would be secured and therefore rank effectively senior in right of payment to the Notes to the extent of the values of the assets securing such debt, (3) indebtedness of ours that is guaranteed by one or more of our subsidiaries and which therefore is structurally senior to the Notes and (4) securities, indebtedness or obligations issued or incurred by our subsidiaries or the portfolio companies with respect to which we hold an equity investment that would be senior to our equity interests in those entities and therefore rank structurally senior to the Notes with respect to the assets of these entities, in each case other than an incurrence of indebtedness or other obligation that would cause a violation of Section 18(a)(1)(A) as modified by Section 61(a)(1) of the 1940 Act or any successor provisions (whether or not we are subject thereto), but giving effect, in each case, to any exemptive relief granted to us by the SEC. Currently, these provisions generally prohibit us from making additional borrowings, including through the issuance of additional debt or the sale of additional debt securities, unless our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 200% after such borrowings;
· pay dividends on, or purchase or redeem or make any payments in respect of, capital stock or other securities ranking junior in right of payment to the Notes, including subordinated indebtedness, in each case other than dividends, purchases, redemptions or payments that would cause a violation of Section 18(a)(1)(B) as modified by Section 61(a)(1) of the 1940 Act or any successor provisions, but giving effect to any exemptive relief granted to us by the SEC or no-action letter granted by the SEC to another BDC (or the Company if it determines to seek such similar no-action or other relief) permitting the BDC to declare any cash dividend or distribution in order to maintain the BDC’s RIC status. These provisions generally prohibit us from declaring any cash dividend or distribution upon any class of our capital stock, or purchasing any such capital stock if our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, is below 200% at the time of the declaration of the dividend or distribution or the purchase and after deducting the amount of such dividend, distribution or purchase;
· sell assets (other than certain limited restrictions on our ability to consolidate, merge or sell all or substantially all of our assets);
· enter into transactions with affiliates;
· create liens (including liens on the shares of our subsidiaries) or enter into sale and leaseback transactions;
· make investments; or
· create restrictions on the payment of dividends or other amounts to us from our subsidiaries.
In addition, the indenture does not require us to offer to purchase the Notes in connection with a change of control or any other event.
Furthermore, the terms of the indenture and the Notes do not protect holders of the Notes in the event that we experience changes (including significant adverse changes) in our financial condition, results of operations or credit ratings, if any, as they do not require that we adhere to any financial tests or ratios or specified levels of net worth, revenues, income, cash flow, or liquidity.
Our ability to recapitalize, incur additional debt and take a number of other actions that are not limited by the terms of the Notes may have important consequences for you as a holder of the Notes, including making it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to the Notes or negatively affecting the trading value of the Notes.
Other debt we issue or incur in the future could contain more protections for its holders than the indenture and the Notes, including additional covenants and events of default. For example, the indenture under which the Notes are issued does not contain cross-default provisions that are contained in the Credit Facility. The issuance or incurrence of any such debt with incremental protections could affect the market for and trading levels and prices of the Notes.
An active trading market for the Notes may not develop, which could limit your ability to sell the Notes or the market price of the Notes.
The Notes are listed on the NYSE under the symbol ‘‘SAQ.’’ We cannot provide any assurances that an active trading market will develop or be maintained for the Notes or that you will be able to sell your Notes. If the Notes are traded after their initial issuance, they may trade at a discount from their initial offering price depending on prevailing interest rates, the market for similar securities, our credit ratings, if any, general economic conditions, our financial condition, performance and prospects and other factors. The underwriters involved in the offering of the Notes have advised us that they intend to make a market in the Notes, but they are not obligated to do so. The underwriters may discontinue any market-making in the Notes at any time at their sole discretion.
Accordingly, we cannot assure you that a liquid trading market will develop for the Notes, that you will be able to sell your Notes at a particular time or that the price you receive when you sell will be favorable. To the extent an active trading market does not develop, the liquidity and trading price for the Notes may be harmed. Accordingly, you may be required to bear the financial risk of an investment in the Notes for an indefinite period of time.
We may choose to redeem the Notes when prevailing interest rates are relatively low.
On or after May 31, 2016, we may choose to redeem the Notes from time to time, especially when prevailing interests rates are lower than the rate borne by the Notes. If prevailing rates are lower at the time of redemption, you would not be able to reinvest the redemption proceeds in a comparable security at an effective interest rate as high as the interest rate on the Notes being redeemed. Our redemption right also may adversely impact your ability to sell the Notes as the optional redemption date or period approaches.
If we default on our obligations to pay our other indebtedness, we may not be able to make payments on the Notes.
Any default under the agreements governing our indebtedness, including a default under the Credit Facility or other indebtedness to which we may be a party that is not waived by the required lenders, and the remedies sought by the holders of such indebtedness could make us unable to pay principal, premium, if any, and interest on the Notes and substantially decrease the market value of the Notes. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow and are otherwise unable to obtain funds necessary to meet required payments of principal, premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness, or if we otherwise fail to comply with the various covenants, including financial and operating covenants, in the instruments governing our indebtedness, we could be in default under the terms of the agreements governing such indebtedness, including the Notes. In the event of such default, the holders of such indebtedness could elect to declare all the funds borrowed thereunder to be due and payable, together with accrued and unpaid interest, the lender under the Credit Facility or other debt we may incur in the future could elect to terminate its commitment, cease making further loans and institute foreclosure proceedings against our assets, and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation. In addition, any such default may constitute a default under the Notes, which could further limit our ability to repay our debt, including the Notes. If our operating performance declines, we may in the future need to seek to obtain waivers from the lender under the Credit Facility or other debt that we may incur in the future to avoid being in default. If we breach our covenants under the Credit Facility or other debt and seek a waiver, we may not be able to obtain a waiver from the required lenders. If this occurs, we would be in default under the Credit Facility or other debt, the lender could exercise its rights as described above, and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation. If we are unable to repay debt, lenders having secured obligations could proceed against the collateral securing the debt. Because the Credit Facility has, and any future credit facilities will likely have, customary cross-default provisions, if the indebtedness under the Notes, the Credit Facility or under any future credit facility is accelerated, we may be unable to repay or finance the amounts due.
Item 1B.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
Item 2.
Item 2. Properties
We do not own any real estate or other physical properties important to our operations, however, an affiliate of our investment adviser leases office space for our executive offices at 535 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10022.
Item 3.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
On August 31, 2012, a complaint was filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York by GSC Acquisition Holdings, LLC against us to recover, among other things, approximately $2.6 million for the benefit of the estates and the general unsecured creditors of GSC Group, Inc. and its affiliates, including the Company’s former investment adviser, GSCP (NJ), L.P. The complaint alleges that the former investment adviser made a constructively fraudulent transfer of $2.6 million in deferred incentive fees by waiving them in connection with the termination of an investment advisory and management agreement with us, and that the termination of the investment advisory and management agreement was itself a fraudulent transfer. These transfers, the complaint alleges, were made without receipt of reasonably equivalent value and while the former investment adviser was insolvent. The complaint has not yet been served, and the plaintiff’s motion for authority to prosecute the case on behalf of the estates was taken under advisement by the court on October 1, 2012. We opposed that motion. We believe that the claims in this lawsuit are without merit and, if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed, intend to vigorously defend against this action.
Except as discussed above, neither we nor our wholly-owned subsidiaries, Saratoga Investment Funding LLC and Saratoga Investment Corp. SBIC LP, are currently subject to any material legal proceedings.
Item 4.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
None.
PART II
Item 5.
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Price range of common stock
Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “SAR.” Prior to July 30, 2010, our common stock traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “GNV.” The following table sets forth, for the two most recent fiscal years and the current fiscal year, the range of high and low sales prices of our common stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange, the sales price as a percentage of our net asset value (“NAV”) and the dividends declared by us for each fiscal quarter. The net asset value per share and high and low sales prices listed below reflect the 1:10 reverse stock split that occurred on August 12, 2010.
* Not determinable at the time of filing.
(1) Net asset value per share is determined as of the last day in the relevant quarter and therefore may not reflect the net asset value per share on the date of the high and low closing sales prices. The net asset values shown are based on outstanding shares at the end of each period.
Holders
The last reported price for our common stock on May 28, 2013 was $18.49 per share. As of May 28, 2013, there were 24 holders of record of our common stock.
Dividend Policy
The following table summarizes our dividends or distributions declared during fiscal 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013:
(1) This dividend was paid by combination of shares of common stock and cash. Please see the discussion immediately following this table for more detail about the composition of this dividend.
Our distributions, if any, will be determined by our board of directors and paid out of assets legally available for distribution. Any such distributions will be taxable to our stockholders, including to those stockholders who receive additional shares of our common stock pursuant to our dividend reinvestment plan. Prior to January 2009, we paid quarterly dividends to our stockholders. However, in January 2009, we suspended the practice of paying quarterly dividends to our stockholders and have made four dividend distributions (in December 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009) to our stockholders since such time. We are prohibited from making distributions that cause us to fail to maintain the asset coverage ratios stipulated by the 1940 Act, subject to certain exceptions, or that violate our debt covenants.
Given the size of our asset base and our growing pipeline of attractive investments, our board of directors believes that using our capital resources to build and diversify our portfolio serves stockholders’ interests best by better positioning us to generate current income and capital appreciation on an increasing scale in future periods. Therefore, our board of directors determined to pay a 20.0%
cash and 80.0% stock dividend with respect to a significant portion of our taxable income for our 2013 fiscal year in accordance with certain IRS private letter rulings. For more detailed information about this dividend, please see the discussion below.
In order to maintain our qualification as a RIC, we must for each fiscal year distribute an amount equal to at least 90.0% of our ordinary net taxable income and realized net short-term capital gains in excess of realized net long-term capital losses, if any, reduced by deductible expenses. In addition, we will be subject to federal excise taxes to the extent we do not distribute during the calendar year at least (1) 98.0% of our ordinary income for the calendar year, (2) 98.2% of our capital gains in excess of capital losses for the one year period ending on October 31 of the calendar year and (3) any ordinary income and net capital gains for preceding years that were not distributed during such years and on which we paid no federal income tax. For the 2012 calendar year, the Company made distributions sufficient such that we did not incur any federal excise taxes. We may elect to withhold from distribution a portion of our ordinary income for the 2013 calendar year and/or portion of the capital gains in excess of capital losses realized during the one year period ending October 31, 2013, if any, and, if we do so, we would expect to incur federal excise taxes as a result.
We maintain an “opt out” dividend reinvestment plan for our common stockholders. As a result, if we declare a dividend, then stockholders’ cash dividends will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of our common stock, unless they specifically “opt out” of the dividend reinvestment plan so as to receive cash dividends.
Pursuant to a revenue procedure (Revenue Procedure 2010-12), or the Revenue Procedure, issued by the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, the IRS indicated that it would treat distributions from certain publicly traded RICs (including BDCs) that were paid part in cash and part in stock as dividends that would satisfy the RIC’s annual distribution requirements and qualify for the dividends paid deduction for federal income tax purposes. In order to qualify for such treatment, the Revenue Procedure required that at least 10.0% of the total distribution be payable in cash and that each stockholder have a right to elect to receive its entire distribution in cash. If too many stockholders elected to receive cash, each stockholder electing to receive cash must receive a proportionate share of the cash to be distributed (although no stockholder electing to receive cash may receive less than 10.0% of such stockholder’s distribution in cash). This Revenue Procedure applied to distributions declared on or before December 31, 2012 with respect to taxable years ending on or before December 31, 2011.
Although this Revenue Procedure is no longer available and did not apply to our distributions for our fiscal year ended February 28, 2013, the revenue procedure was based upon certain applicable provisions of the Code and the Treasury regulations pursuant to which distributions payable in cash or in shares of stock at the election of stockholders are treated as taxable dividends. Consistent with these provisions, the IRS has issued private letter rulings concluding that a RIC may treat a distribution of its own stock as fulfilling its RIC distribution requirements if each stockholder may elect to receive his or her entire distribution in either cash or stock of the RIC subject to a limitation on the aggregate amount of cash to be distributed to all stockholders, which limitation must be at least 20.0% of the aggregate declared distribution.
On November 9, 2012, our board of directors declared a dividend of $4.25 per share payable on December 31, 2012, to common stockholders of record on November 20, 2012. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to approximately $3.3 million or $0.85 per share.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of $3.3 million in cash and 853,455 shares of common stock, or 22.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 20.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $15.444 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 14, 17 and 19, 2012.
On November 15, 2011, our board of directors declared a dividend of $3.00 per share payable on December 30, 2011, to common stockholders of record on November 25, 2011. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to $2.0 million or $0.60 per share.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of $2.0 million in cash and 599,584 shares of common stock, or 18.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 20.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based
on a price of $13.12 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 20, 21 and 22, 2011.
On November 12, 2010, we declared a dividend of $4.40 per share which was paid on December 29, 2010. Stockholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that at least 10.0% of the distribution is payable in cash. Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of $1.2 million in cash and 596,235 shares of common stock, or 22.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 10.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $17.8049 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 20, 21 and 22, 2010.
On November 13, 2009, we declared a dividend of $18.25 per share payable on December 31, 2009. Stockholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all stockholders was limited to $2.1 million or $0.25 per share. Based on stockholder elections, the dividend consisted of $2.1 million in cash and 8,648,725 shares of common stock, or 104.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 13.7% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to stockholders who elected to receive cash.
Performance Graph
The following graph compares the return on our common stock with that of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index and the NASDAQ Financial 100 index, for the period from March 23, 2007, the date our common stock began trading, through February 28, 2013. The graph assumes that, on March 23, 2007, a person invested $100 in each of our common stock, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index and the NASDAQ Financial 100 index. The graph measures total shareholder return, which takes into account both changes in stock price and dividends. It assumes that dividends paid are reinvested in like securities.
Sales of unregistered securities
Not applicable.
Issuer purchases of equity securities
We did not purchase any shares of our common stock in the open market during the year ended February 28, 2013.
Item 6.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
The following selected financial and other data for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, February 28, 2011, 2010 and 2009 are derived from our consolidated financial statements which have been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, whose report thereon is included within this Annual Report. The data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, which are included elsewhere in this Annual Report, and Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”.
SARATOGA INVESTMENT CORP.
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
(dollar amounts in thousands, except share and per share numbers)
(1) See note 6 in consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere herein.
(2) For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, 2010, and 2009 amounts are calculated using weighted average common shares outstanding of 4,110,484, 3,434,345, 2,437,577, 1,061,351, and 829,138, respectively.
(3) Based on 4.7 million common shares outstanding.
(4) Dilutive effect of the issuance of shares of common stock below net asset value per share in connection with the satisfaction of the Company’s annual RIC distribution requirement. See “Price Range of Common Stock and Distributions - Dividend Policy.”
(5) Earnings per share figures for February 28, 2009 and February 28, 2010 were updated and do not reflect historical 10-K’s.
Item 7.
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and related notes and other financial information appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report. In addition to historical information, the following discussion and other parts of this Annual Report contain forward-looking information that involves risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated by such forward-looking information due to the factors discussed under Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors” and “Note about Forward-Looking Statements” appearing elsewhere herein.
Overview
We are a Maryland corporation that has elected to be treated as a business development company (“BDC”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”). Our investment objective is to generate current income and, to a lesser extent, capital appreciation from our investments. We invest primarily in leveraged loans and mezzanine debt issued by private U.S. middle market companies, which we define as companies having EBITDA of between $5 million and $50 million, both through direct lending and through participation in loan syndicates. We may also invest up to 30.0% of the portfolio in opportunistic investments in order to seek to enhance returns to stockholders. Such investments may include investments in distressed debt, which may include securities of companies in bankruptcy, foreign debt, private equity, securities of public companies that are not thinly traded and structured finance vehicles such as collateralized loan obligation funds. We have elected and qualified to be treated as a regulated investment company (“RIC”) under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).
Corporate History and Recent Developments
We commenced operations, at the time known as GSC Investment Corp., on March 23, 2007 and completed an initial public offering of shares of common stock on March 28, 2007. Prior to July 30, 2010, we were externally managed and advised by GSCP (NJ), L.P., an entity affiliated with GSC Group, Inc. In connection with the consummation of a recapitalization transaction on July 30, 2010, we engaged Saratoga Investment Advisors (“SIA”) to replace GSCP (NJ), L.P. as our investment adviser and changed our name to Saratoga Investment Corp.
As a result of the event of default under a revolving securitized credit facility with Deutsche Bank we previously had in place, in December 2008 we engaged the investment banking firm of Stifel, Nicolaus & Company to evaluate strategic transaction opportunities and consider alternatives for us. On April 14, 2010, we entered into a stock purchase agreement with Saratoga Investment Advisors and certain of its affiliates and an assignment, assumption and novation agreement with Saratoga Investment Advisors, pursuant to which we assumed certain rights and obligations of Saratoga Investment Advisors under a debt commitment letter Saratoga Investment Advisors received from Madison Capital Funding LLC, indicating Madison Capital Funding’s willingness to provide us with a $40.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility, subject to the satisfaction of certain terms and conditions. In addition, we and GSCP (NJ), L.P. entered into a termination and release agreement, to be effective as of the closing of the transaction contemplated by the stock purchase agreement, pursuant to which GSCP (NJ), L.P., among other things, agreed to waive any and all accrued and unpaid deferred incentive management fees up to and as of the closing of the transaction contemplated by the stock purchase agreement but continued to be entitled to receive the base management fees earned through the date of the closing of the transaction contemplated by the stock purchase agreement.
On July 30, 2010, the transactions contemplated by the stock purchase agreement with Saratoga Investment Advisors and certain of its affiliates were completed, and included the following actions:
· the private sale of 986,842 shares of our common stock for $15.0 million in aggregate purchase price to Saratoga Investment Advisors and certain of its affiliates;
· the closing of the $40.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility with Madison Capital Funding;
· the execution of a registration rights agreement with the investors in the private sale transaction, pursuant to which, among other things, we agreed to file a registration statement with the SEC to register for resale the shares of our common stock sold in the private sale transaction, including any shares of common stock issued or issuable upon any stock split, dividend or other distribution, recapitalization or similar event relating thereto, and to use commercially reasonable efforts to cause such registration statement to be declared effective within 90 days after the date on which the registration statement was initially filed with the SEC;
· the execution of a trademark license agreement with Saratoga Investment Advisors pursuant to which Saratoga Investment Advisors granted us a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the “Saratoga” name, for so long as Saratoga Investment Advisors or one of its affiliates remains our investment adviser; and
· replacing GSCP (NJ), L.P. as our investment adviser and administrator with Saratoga Investment Advisors by executing an investment advisory and management agreement, which was approved by our stockholders, and an administration agreement with Saratoga Investment Advisors;
· the resignations of Robert F. Cummings, Jr. and Richard M. Hayden, both of whom are affiliates of GSCP (NJ) L.P., as members of the board of directors and the election of Christian L. Oberbeck and Richard A. Petrocelli, both of whom are affiliates of Saratoga Investment Advisors, as members of the board of directors;
· the resignation of all of our then existing executive officers and the appointment by our board of directors of Mr. Oberbeck as our chief executive officer and Mr. Petrocelli as our chief financial officer, secretary and chief compliance officer; and
· our name change from “GSC Investment Corp.” to “Saratoga Investment Corp.”
We used the net proceeds from the private sale transaction and a portion of the funds available to us under the $40.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility with Madison Capital Funding to pay the full amount of principal and accrued interest, including default interest, outstanding under our revolving securitized credit facility with Deutsche Bank. The revolving securitized credit facility with Deutsche Bank was terminated in connection with our payment of all amounts outstanding thereunder on July 30, 2010.
On August 12, 2010, we effected a one-for-ten reverse stock split of our outstanding common stock. As a result of the reverse stock split, every ten shares of our common stock were converted into one share of our common stock. Any fractional shares received as a result of the reverse stock split were redeemed for cash. The total cash payment in lieu of shares was $230. Immediately after the reverse stock split, we had 2,680,842 shares of our common stock outstanding.
In January 2011, we registered for public resale the 982,842 shares of our common stock issued to Saratoga Investment Advisors and certain of its affiliates.
Critical Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions affecting amounts reported in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. We have identified investment valuation, revenue recognition and the recognition of capital gains incentive fee expense as our most critical accounting estimates. We continuously evaluate our estimates, including those related to the matters described below. These estimates are based on the information that is currently available to us and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results could differ materially from those estimates under different assumptions or conditions. A discussion of our critical accounting policies follows.
Investment Valuation
The Company accounts for its investments at fair value in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”). ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, establishes a fair value hierarchy based on the quality of inputs used to measure fair value and enhances disclosure requirements for fair value measurements. ASC 820 requires the Company to assume that its investments are to be sold at the statement of assets and liabilities date in the principal market to independent market participants, or in the absence of a principal market, in the most advantageous market, which may be a hypothetical market. Market participants are defined as buyers and sellers in the principal or most advantageous market that are independent, knowledgeable, and willing and able to transact.
Investments for which market quotations are readily available are fair valued at such market quotations obtained from independent third party pricing services and market makers subject to any decision by our board of directors to approve a fair value determination to reflect significant events affecting the value of these investments. We value investments for which market quotations are not readily available at fair value as approved, in good faith, by our board of directors based on input from Saratoga Investment Advisers, the audit committee of our board of directors and a third party independent valuation firm. Determinations of fair value may involve subjective judgments and estimates. The types of factors that may be considered in determining the fair value of our investments include the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments, market yield trend analysis, the markets in which the portfolio company does business, comparison to publicly traded companies, discounted cash flow and other relevant factors.
We undertake a multi-step valuation process each quarter when valuing investments for which market quotations are not readily available, as described below:
· Each investment is initially valued by the responsible investment professionals of Saratoga Investment Advisors and preliminary valuation conclusions are documented and discussed with our senior management; and
· An independent valuation firm engaged by our board of directors reviews approximately one quarter of these preliminary valuations each quarter so that the valuation of each investment for which market quotes are not readily available is reviewed by the independent valuation firm at least annually.
In addition, all our investments are subject to the following valuation process:
· The audit committee of our board of directors reviews each preliminary valuation and Saratoga Investment Advisors and independent valuation firm (if applicable) will supplement the preliminary valuation to reflect any comments provided by the audit committee; and
· Our board of directors discusses the valuations and approves the fair value of each investment, in good faith, based on the input of Saratoga Investment Advisors, independent valuation firm (to the extent applicable) and the audit committee of our board of directors.
Our investment in GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007, Ltd. (“Saratoga CLO”) is carried at fair value, which is based on a discounted cash flow model that utilizes prepayment, re-investment and loss assumptions based on historical experience and projected performance, economic factors, the characteristics of the underlying cash flow, and comparable yields for equity interests in collateralized loan obligation funds similar to Saratoga CLO, when available, as determined by S/A and recommended to our board of directors. Specifically, we use Intex cash flow models, or an appropriate substitute, to form the basis for the valuation of our investment in Saratoga CLO. The models use a set of assumptions including projected default rates, recovery rates, reinvestment rate and prepayment rates in order to arrive at estimated valuations. The assumptions are based on available market data and projections provided by third parties as well as management estimates. We use the output from the Intex models (i.e., the estimated cash flows) to perform a discounted cash flows analysis on expected future cash flows to determine a valuation for our investment in Saratoga CLO.
Revenue Recognition
Income Recognition
Interest income, adjusted for amortization of premium and accretion of discount, is recorded on an accrual basis to the extent that such amounts are expected to be collected. The Company stops accruing interest on its investments when it is determined that interest is no longer collectible. Discounts and premiums on investments purchased are accreted/amortized over the life of the respective investment using the effective yield method. The amortized cost of investments represents the original cost adjusted for the accretion of discounts and amortizations of premium on investments.
Loans are generally placed on non-accrual status when there is reasonable doubt that principal or interest will be collected. Accrued interest is generally reserved when a loan is placed on non-accrual status. Interest payments received on non-accrual loans may be recognized as a reduction in principal depending upon management’s judgment regarding collectability. Non-accrual loans are restored to accrual status when past due principal and interest is paid and, in management’s judgment, are likely to remain current, although we may make exceptions to this general rule if the loan has sufficient collateral value and is in the process of collection.
Interest income on our investment in Saratoga CLO is recorded using the effective interest method in accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 325-40, Investments-Other, Beneficial Interests in Securitized Financial Assets, based on the anticipated yield and the estimated cash flows over the projected life of the investment. Yields are revised when there are changes in actual or estimated cash flows due to changes in prepayments and/or re-investments, credit losses or asset pricing. Changes in estimated yield are recognized as an adjustment to the estimated yield over the remaining life of the investment from the date the estimated yield was changed.
Paid-in-Kind Interest
The Company holds debt investments in its portfolio that contain a payment-in-kind (“PIK”) interest provision. The PIK interest, which represents contractually deferred interest added to the investment balance that is generally due at maturity, is generally recorded on the accrual basis to the extent such amounts are expected to be collected. We stop accruing PIK interest if we do not expect the issuer to be able to pay all principal and interest when due.
Capital Gains Incentive Fee
The Company records an expense accrual relating to the capital gains incentive fee payable by the Company to its investment adviser when the unrealized gains on its investments exceed all realized capital losses on its investments given the fact that a capital gains incentive fee would be owed to the investment adviser if the Company were to liquidate its investment portfolio at such time. The actual incentive fee payable to the Company’s investment adviser related to capital gains will be determined and payable in arrears at the end of each fiscal year and will include only realized capital gains for the period.
Revenues
We generate revenue in the form of interest income and capital gains on the debt investments that we hold and capital gains, if any, on equity interests that we may acquire. We expect our debt investments, whether in the form of leveraged loans or mezzanine debt, to have terms of up to ten years, and to bear interest at either a fixed or floating rate. Interest on debt will be payable generally either quarterly or semi-annually. In some cases, our debt investments may provide for a portion of the interest to be paid-in-kind (“PIK”). To the extent interest is paid-in-kind, it will be payable through the increase of the principal amount of the obligation by the amount of interest due on the then-outstanding aggregate principal amount of such obligation. The principal amount of the debt and any accrued but unpaid interest will generally become due at the maturity date. In addition, we may generate revenue in the form of commitment, origination, structuring or diligence fees, fees for providing managerial assistance or investment management services and possibly consulting fees. Any such fees will be generated in connection with our investments and recognized as earned. We may also invest in preferred equity securities that pay dividends on a current basis.
On January 22, 2008, we entered into a collateral management agreement with Saratoga CLO, pursuant to which we act as its collateral manager and receive a senior collateral management fee of 0.10% and a subordinate collateral management fee of 0.40% of the outstanding principal amount of Saratoga CLO’s assets, paid quarterly to the extent of available proceeds. We are also entitled to an incentive management fee equal to 20.0% of excess cash flow to the extent the Saratoga CLO subordinated notes receive an internal rate of return equal to or greater than 12.0%.
We recognize interest income on our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO using the effective interest method, based on the anticipated yield and the estimated cash flows over the projected life of the investment. Yields are revised when there are changes in actual or estimated cash flows due to changes in prepayments and/or re-investments, credit losses or asset pricing. Changes in estimated yield are recognized as an adjustment to the estimated yield over the remaining life of the investment from the date the estimated yield was changed.
Expenses
Our primary operating expenses include the payment of investment advisory and management fees, professional fees, directors and officers insurance, fees paid to independent directors and administrator expenses, including our allocable portion of our administrator’s overhead. Our investment advisory and management fees compensate our investment adviser for its work in identifying, evaluating, negotiating, closing and monitoring our investments. We bear all other costs and expenses of our operations and transactions, including those relating to:
· organization;
· calculating our net asset value (including the cost and expenses of any independent valuation firm);
· expenses incurred by our investment adviser payable to third parties, including agents, consultants or other advisers, in monitoring our financial and legal affairs and in monitoring our investments and performing due diligence on our prospective portfolio companies;
· interest payable on debt, if any, incurred to finance our investments;
· offerings of our common stock and other securities;
· investment advisory and management fees;
· fees payable to third parties, including agents, consultants or other advisers, relating to, or associated with, evaluating and making investments;
· transfer agent and custodial fees;
· federal and state registration fees;
· all costs of registration and listing our common stock on any securities exchange;
· federal, state and local taxes;
· independent directors’ fees and expenses;
· costs of preparing and filing reports or other documents required by governmental bodies (including the SEC and the SBA);
· costs of any reports, proxy statements or other notices to common stockholders including printing costs;
· our fidelity bond, directors and officers errors and omissions liability insurance, and any other insurance premiums;
· direct costs and expenses of administration, including printing, mailing, long distance telephone, copying, secretarial and other staff, independent auditors and outside legal costs; and
· administration fees and all other expenses incurred by us or, if applicable, the administrator in connection with administering our business (including payments under the administration agreement based upon our allocable portion of the administrator’s overhead in performing its obligations under an administration agreement, including rent and the allocable portion of the cost of our officers and their respective staffs (including travel expenses)).
Pursuant to the investment advisory and management agreement that we had with GSCP (NJ), L.P., our former investment adviser and administrator, we had agreed to pay GSCP (NJ), L.P. as investment adviser a quarterly base management fee of 1.75% of the average value of our total assets (other than cash or cash equivalents but including assets purchased with borrowed funds) at the end of the two most recently completed fiscal quarters, and appropriately adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during the applicable fiscal quarter, and an incentive fee.
The incentive fee had two parts:
· A fee, payable quarterly in arrears, equal to 20.0% of our pre-incentive fee net investment income, expressed as a rate of return on the value of the net assets at the end of the immediately preceding quarter, that exceeded a 1.875% quarterly (7.5% annualized) hurdle rate measured as of the end of each fiscal quarter. Under this provision, in any fiscal quarter, our investment adviser received no incentive fee unless our pre-incentive fee net investment income exceeded the hurdle rate of 1.875%. Amounts received as a return of capital were not included in calculating this portion of the incentive fee. Since the hurdle rate was based on net assets, a return of less than the hurdle rate on total assets could still have resulted in an incentive fee.
· A fee, payable at the end of each fiscal year, equal to 20.0% of our net realized capital gains, if any, computed net of all realized capital losses and unrealized capital depreciation, in each case on a cumulative basis, less the aggregate amount of capital gains incentive fees paid to the investment adviser through such date.
We deferred cash payment of any incentive fee otherwise earned by our former investment adviser if, during the then most recent four full fiscal quarters ending on or prior to the date such payment was to be made, the sum of (a) our aggregate distributions to our stockholders and (b) our change in net assets (defined as total assets less liabilities) (before taking into account any incentive fees payable during that period) was less than 7.5% of our net assets at the beginning of such period. These calculations were appropriately pro rated for the first three fiscal quarters of operation and adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during the applicable period. Such incentive fee would become payable on the next date on which such test had been satisfied for the most recent four full fiscal quarters or upon certain terminations of the investment advisory and management agreement. We commenced deferring cash payment of incentive fees during the quarterly period ended August 31, 2007, and continued to defer such payments through the quarterly period ended May 31, 2010. As of July 30, 2010, the date on which GSCP (NJ), L.P. ceased to be our investment adviser and administrator, we owed GSCP (NJ), L.P. $2.9 million in fees for services previously provided to us; of which $0.3 million has been paid by us. GSCP (NJ), L.P. agreed to waive payment by us of the remaining $2.6 million in connection with the consummation of the stock purchase transaction with Saratoga Investment Advisors and certain of its affiliates described elsewhere in this Annual Report.
The terms of the investment advisory and management agreement with Saratoga Investment Advisors, our current investment adviser, are substantially similar to the terms of the investment advisory and management agreement we had entered into with GSCP (NJ), L.P., our former investment adviser, except for the following material distinctions in the fee terms:
· The capital gains portion of the incentive fee was reset with respect to gains and losses from May 31, 2010, and therefore losses and gains incurred prior to such time will not be taken into account when calculating the capital gains fee payable to Saratoga Investment Advisors and, as a result, Saratoga Investment Advisors will be entitled to 20.0% of net gains that arise after May 31, 2010. In addition, the cost basis for computing realized gains and losses on investments held by us as of May 31, 2010 equal the fair value of such investment as of such date. Under the investment advisory and management agreement with our former investment adviser, GSCP (NJ), L.P., the capital gains fee was calculated from March 21, 2007, and the gains were substantially outweighed by losses.
· Under the “catch up” provision, 100.0% of our pre-incentive fee net investment income with respect to that portion of such pre-incentive fee net investment income that exceeds 1.875% (7.5% annualized) but is less than or equal to 2.344% in any fiscal quarter is payable to Saratoga Investment Advisors. This will enable Saratoga Investment Advisors to receive 20.0% of all net investment income as such amount approaches 2.344% in any quarter, and Saratoga Investment Advisors will receive 20.0% of any additional net investment income. Under the investment advisory and management agreement with our former investment adviser, GSCP (NJ), L.P. only received 20.0% of the excess net investment income over 1.875%.
· We will no longer have deferral rights regarding incentive fees in the event that the distributions to stockholders and change in net assets is less than 7.5% for the preceding four fiscal quarters.
To the extent that any of our leveraged loans are denominated in a currency other than U.S. dollars, we may enter into currency hedging contracts to reduce our exposure to fluctuations in currency exchange rates. We may also enter into interest rate hedging agreements. Such hedging activities, which will be subject to compliance with applicable legal requirements, may include the use of interest rate caps, futures, options and forward contracts. Costs incurred in entering into or settling such contracts will be borne by us.
Portfolio and investment activity
Corporate Debt Portfolio Overview
(1) Excludes our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO and investments in common stocks and limited partnership interests.
(2) Excludes our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO and limited partnership interests.
During the fiscal year ended February 28, 2013, we made $71.6 million investments in new or existing portfolio companies and had $21.5 million in aggregate amount of exits and repayments resulting in net investments of $50.1 million for the year.
During the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012, we made $38.7 million investments in new or existing portfolio companies and had $33.6 million in aggregate amount of exits and repayments resulting in net investments of $5.1 million for the year.
During the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011, we made $9.0 million investments in new or existing portfolio companies and had $32.0 million in aggregate amount of exits and repayments resulting in net repayments of $23.0 million for the year.
Our portfolio composition at February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011 at fair value was as follows:
Portfolio composition
Our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO represents a first loss position in a portfolio that, at February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, was composed of $383.3 million, $380.2 million, and $410.2 million, respectively, in aggregate principal amount of predominantly senior secured first lien term loans. This investment is subject to unique risks. (“Risk Factors-Our investment in GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007 LTD. constitutes a leveraged investment in a portfolio of predominantly senior secured first lien term loans and is subject to additional risks and volatility”). We do not consolidate the Saratoga CLO portfolio in our financial statements. Accordingly, the metrics below do not include the underlying Saratoga CLO portfolio investments. However, at February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2011, one, one, and three Saratoga CLO portfolio investments with a fair value of $1.0 million, $0.7 million and $3.3 million, respectively, were in default and $378.7 million, $379.5 million and 320.8 million, or 98.5%, 99.3% and 97.0%, respectively, of the Saratoga CLO portfolio investments had a CMR (as defined below) color rating of green or yellow. For more information relating to Saratoga CLO, see the audit financial statements for Saratoga CLO included elsewhere herein.
Saratoga Investment Advisors normally grades all of our investments using a credit and monitoring rating system (“CMR”). The CMR consists of a single component: a color rating. The color rating is based on several criteria, including financial and operating strength, probability of default, and restructuring risk. The color ratings are characterized as follows: (Green)-strong credit; (Yellow)-satisfactory credit; (Red)-payment default risk, in payment default and/or significant restructuring activity.
The CMR distribution of our investments at February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012 was as follows:
Portfolio CMR distribution
(1) Comprised of our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO, equity interests, and limited partnership interests.
Portfolio composition by industry grouping at fair value
The following table shows the portfolio composition by industry grouping at fair value at February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012.
(1) Comprised of our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO.
Portfolio composition by geographic location at fair value
The following table shows the portfolio composition by geographic location at fair value at February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012. The geographic composition is determined by the location of the corporate headquarters of the portfolio company.
(1) Comprised of our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO.
Results of operations
Operating results for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011 are as follows:
Investment income
The composition of our investment income in each period was as follows:
For the year ended February 28, 2013, total investment income increased $3.5 million, or 25.9% compared to the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012. Interest income from investments increased $3.2 million, or 28.4%, to $14.4 million for the year ended February 28, 2013 from $11.2 million for the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012.
For the year ended February 29, 2012, total investment income decreased $0.6 million, or 4.7% compared to the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011. Interest income from our investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO increased $0.9 million, or 27.4%, to $4.2 million for the year ended February 29, 2012 from $3.3 million for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011.
For the fiscal years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, total PIK income was $1.1 million, $1.4 million, and $1.1 million, respectively.
Operating expenses
The composition of our operating expenses in each period was as follows:
Operating Expenses
For the year ended February 28, 2013, total operating expenses before manager expense waiver and reimbursement increased $2.2 million, or 27.8% compared to the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012. For the year ended February 29, 2012, total operating expenses before manager expense waiver and reimbursement decreased $4.0 million, or 33.9% compared to the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011.
For the year ended February 28, 2013, the increase in interest and credit facility expense is primarily attributable to an increase in outstanding debt during the year. For the year ended February 29, 2012, the decrease in interest and credit facility expense is primarily attributable to a decrease in outstanding debt during the year. For the year ended February 28, 2013, the weighted average interest rate on our outstanding indebtedness was 6.35% compared to 7.50% for the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012 and 8.75% for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011.
For the year ended February 28, 2013, base management fees increased $0.5 million, or 30.3% compared to the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012. The increase in base management fees results from the increase in the average value of our total net assets. For the year ended February 29, 2012, base management fees decreased $0.03 million, or 1.7% compared to the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011. The reduction in base management fees results from the slight decrease in the average value of our total net assets.
For the year ended February 28, 2013, professional fees decreased $0.3 million, or 18.2% compared to the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012. For the year ended February 29, 2012, professional fees decreased $1.9 million, or 56.2% compared to the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011. The change in professional fees for these periods is attributable to additional legal and professional fees incurred in the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011 associated with the evaluation of strategic transaction opportunities including the refinancing of the Company’s senior credit facility and the stock purchase transaction with Saratoga Investment Advisors and certain of its affiliates described elsewhere in this Annual Report.
For the year ended February 28, 2013, incentive management fees increased $0.8 million, or 62.7% compared to the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012. The increase in incentive management fees is primarily attributable to an increase in accrued incentive fees related to net investment income. For the year ended February 29, 2012, incentive management fees decreased $0.6 million, or 32.7% compared to the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011. The decrease in incentive management fees is primarily attributable to a decrease in accrued incentive fees related to capital gains. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Critical Accounting Policies-Capital Gains Incentive Fee.”
Net realized gains/losses on sales of investments
For the fiscal year ended February 28, 2013, the Company had $21.5 million of sales, repayments, exits or restructurings resulting in $0.6 million of net realized gains. The most significant realized gains and losses during the year ended February 28, 2013 were as follows:
Fiscal year ended February 28, 2013
For the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012, the Company had $33.6 million of sales, repayments, exits or restructurings resulting in $12.2 million of net realized losses. The most significant realized gains and losses during the year ended February 29, 2012 were as follows:
Fiscal year ended February 29, 2012
For the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011, the Company had $32.0 million of sales, repayments, exits or restructurings resulting in $24.7 million of net realized losses. The most significant realized gains and losses during the year ended February 28, 2011 were as follows:
Fiscal year ended February 28, 2011
Net unrealized appreciation/depreciation on investments
For the year ended February 28, 2013, our investments had an increase in net unrealized appreciation of $7.0 million versus an increase in net unrealized appreciation of $19.8 million for the year ended February 29, 2012. The most significant cumulative changes in unrealized appreciation and depreciation for the year ended February 28, 2013, were the following:
Fiscal year ended February 28, 2013
For the year ended February 29, 2012, our investments had an increase in net unrealized appreciation of $19.8 million versus an increase in net unrealized appreciation of $36.4 million for the year ended February 28, 2011. The most significant cumulative changes in unrealized appreciation and depreciation for the year ended February 29, 2012, were the following:
Fiscal year ended February 29, 2012
The $6.9 million net unrealized appreciation in our investment in the Saratoga CLO subordinated notes was due to higher cash flow projections based on an increase in principal balance and an improvement in the overcollateralization ratios, a decrease in the assumed portfolio default rate (based on better than forecast actual default rates and improved default forecasts) and an improvement in reinvestment assumptions based on current market conditions and projections. In addition, for the year ended February 29, 2012 we had approximately $15.7 million of unrealized appreciation due to the reversal of prior period unrealized depreciation recorded upon the exit of certain investments including approximately $6.1 million related to Energy Alloys, L.L.C., $6.3 million related to Grant U.S. Holdings LLP., $2.3 million related to Bankruptcy Management Solutions and $1.1 million related to Pracs Institute, LTD.
For the year ended February 28, 2011, our investments had an increase in net unrealized appreciation of $36.4 million versus an increase in net unrealized depreciation of $9.5 million for the year ended February 28, 2010. The most significant cumulative changes in unrealized appreciation and depreciation for the year ended February 28, 2011, were the following:
Fiscal year ended February 28, 2011
The $7.9 million net unrealized appreciation in our investment in the Saratoga CLO subordinated notes was due to a decrease in the assumed portfolio default rate (based on better than forecast actual default rates), a decrease in the assumed recovery rate, and a decrease of “CCC” rated investments and defaulted securities in the portfolio. The decrease in unrealized depreciation in our investments in McMillin Companies, LLC and Elyria Foundry Company, LLC, were due to improved visibility of the outlook for these companies. The increase in unrealized depreciation in our investments in Jason Incorporated and Energy Alloy were due to declining prospects for each of the companies. The change in the fair values of our investments in Grant U.S. Holdings and Penton Media, Inc. were primarily due to fluctuations in the market quotations obtained for these investments compared to the prior period.
Changes in net assets resulting from operations
For the fiscal years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2011 we recorded a net increase in net assets resulting from operations of $14.6 million, $13.3 million, and $17.0 million, respectively. Based on 4,110,484 weighted average common shares outstanding as of February 28, 2013, our per share net increase in net assets resulting from operations was $3.55 for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2013. This compares to a per share net increase in net assets resulting from operations of $3.87 for the fiscal year ended February 29, 2012 (based on 3,434,345 weighted average common shares outstanding as of February 29, 2012), and a per share net increase in net assets resulting from operations of $6.96 for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011 (based on 2,437,577 weighted average common shares outstanding as of February 28, 2011.
Financial condition, liquidity and capital resources
Below is a summary of the terms of the senior secured revolving credit facility we entered into with Madison Capital Funding (the “Replacement Facility”) on June 30, 2010.
Availability. The Company can draw up to the lesser of (i) $40.0 million (the “Facility Amount”) and (ii) the product of the applicable advance rate (which varies from 50.0% to 75.0% depending on the type of loan asset) and the value, determined in accordance with the Replacement Facility (the “Adjusted Borrowing Value”), of certain “eligible” loan assets pledged as security for the loan (the “Borrowing Base”), in each case less (a) the amount of any undrawn funding commitments the Company has under any loan asset and which are not covered by amounts in the Unfunded Exposure Account referred to below (the “Unfunded Exposure Amount”) and (b) outstanding borrowings. Each loan asset held by the Company as of the date on which the Replacement Facility was closed was valued as of that date and each loan asset that the Company acquires after such date will be valued at the lowest of its fair value, its face value (excluding accrued interest) and the purchase price paid for such loan asset. Adjustments to the value of a loan asset will be made to reflect, among other things, changes in its fair value, a default by the obligor on the loan asset, insolvency of the
obligor, acceleration of the loan asset, and certain modifications to the terms of the loan asset.
The Replacement Facility contains limitations on the type of loan assets that are “eligible” to be included in the Borrowing Base and as to the concentration level of certain categories of loan assets in the Borrowing Base such as restrictions on geographic and industry concentrations, asset size and quality, payment frequency, status and terms, average life, and collateral interests. In addition, if an asset is to remain an “eligible” loan asset, the Company may not make changes to the payment, amortization, collateral and certain other terms of the loan assets without the consent of the administrative agent that will either result in subordination of the loan asset or be materially adverse to the lenders.
Collateral. The Replacement Facility is secured by substantially all of the assets of the Company and includes the subordinated notes (“CLO Notes”) issued by Saratoga CLO and the Company’s rights under the CLO Management Agreement (as defined below).
Interest Rate and Fees. Under the Replacement Facility, funds are borrowed from or through certain lenders at the greater of the prevailing LIBOR rate and 2.00%, plus an applicable margin of 5.50%. At the Company’s option, funds may be borrowed based on an alternative base rate, which in no event will be less than 3.00%, and the applicable margin over such alternative base rate is 4.50%. In addition, the Company pays the lenders a commitment fee of 0.75% per year on the unused amount of the Replacement Facility for the duration of the Revolving Period (defined below). Accrued interest and commitment fees are payable monthly. The Company was also obligated to pay certain other fees to the lenders in connection with the closing of the Replacement Facility.
Revolving Period and Maturity Date. The Company may make and repay borrowings under the Replacement Facility for a period of three years following the closing of the Replacement Facility (the “Revolving Period”). The Revolving Period may be terminated at an earlier time by the Company or, upon the occurrence of an event of default, by action of the lenders or automatically. All borrowings and other amounts payable under the Replacement Facility are due and payable in full five years after the end of the Revolving Period.
Collateral Tests. It is a condition precedent to any borrowing under the Replacement Facility that the principal amount outstanding under the Replacement Facility, after giving effect to the proposed borrowings, not exceed the lesser of the Borrowing Base or the Facility Amount (the “Borrowing Base Test”). In addition to satisfying the Borrowing Base Test, the following tests must also be satisfied (together with Borrowing Base Test, the “Collateral Tests”):
· Interest Coverage Ratio. The ratio (expressed as a percentage) of interest collections with respect to pledged loan assets, less certain fees and expenses relating to the Replacement Facility, to accrued interest and commitment fees and any breakage costs payable to the lenders under the Replacement Facility for the last 6 payment periods must equal at least 175.0%.
· Overcollateralization Ratio. The ratio (expressed as a percentage) of the aggregate Adjusted Borrowing Value of “eligible” pledged loan assets plus the fair value of certain ineligible pledged loan assets and the CLO Notes (in each case, subject to certain adjustments) to outstanding borrowings under the Replacement Facility plus the Unfunded Exposure Amount must equal at least 200.0%.
· Weighted Average FMV Test. The aggregate adjusted or weighted value of “eligible” pledged loan assets as a percentage of the aggregate outstanding principal balance of “eligible” pledged loan assets must be equal to or greater than 72.0% and 80.0% during the one-year periods prior to the first and second anniversary of the closing date, respectively, and 85.0% at all times thereafter.
The Replacement Facility also requires payment of outstanding borrowings or replacement of pledged loan assets upon the Company’s breach of its representation and warranty that pledged loan assets included in the Borrowing Base are “eligible” loan assets. Such payments or replacements must equal the lower of the amount by which the Borrowing Base is overstated as a result of such breach or any deficiency under the Collateral Tests at the time of repayment or replacement. Compliance with the Collateral Tests is also a condition to the discretionary sale of pledged loan assets by the Company.
Priority of Payments. During the Revolving Period, the priority of payments provisions of the Replacement Facility require, after payment of specified fees and expenses and any necessary funding of the Unfunded Exposure Account, that collections of principal from the loan assets and, to the extent that these are insufficient, collections of interest from the loan assets, be applied on each payment date to payment of outstanding borrowings if the Borrowing Base Test, the Overcollateralization Ratio and the Interest Coverage Ratio would not otherwise be met. Similarly, following termination of the Revolving Period, collections of interest are required to be applied, after payment of certain fees and expenses, to cure any deficiencies in the Borrowing Base Test, the Interest
Coverage Ratio and the Overcollateralization Ratio as of the relevant payment date.
Reserve Account. The Replacement Facility requires the Company to set aside an amount equal to the sum of accrued interest, commitment fees and administrative agent fees due and payable on the next succeeding three payment dates (or corresponding to three payment periods). If for any monthly period during which fees and other payments accrue, the aggregate Adjusted Borrowing Value of “eligible” pledged loan assets which do not pay cash interest at least quarterly exceeds 15.0% of the aggregate Adjusted Borrowing Value of “eligible” pledged loan assets, the Company is required to set aside such interest and fees due and payable on the next succeeding six payment dates. Amounts in the reserve account can be applied solely to the payment of administrative agent fees, commitment fees, accrued and unpaid interest and any breakage costs payable to the lenders.
Unfunded Exposure Account. With respect to revolver or delayed draw loan assets, the Company is required to set aside in a designated account (the “Unfunded Exposure Account”) 100.0% of its outstanding and undrawn funding commitments with respect to such loan assets. The Unfunded Exposure Account is funded at the time the Company acquires a revolver or delayed draw loan asset and requests a related borrowing under the Replacement Facility. The Unfunded Exposure Account is funded through a combination of proceeds of the requested borrowing and other Company funds, and if for any reason such amounts are insufficient, through application of the priority of payment provisions described above.
Operating Expenses. The priority of payments provision of the Replacement Facility provides for the payment of certain operating expenses of the Company out of collections on principal and interest during the Revolving Period and out of collections on interest following the termination of the Revolving Period in accordance with the priority established in such provision. The operating expenses payable pursuant to the priority of payment provisions is limited to $350,000 for each monthly payment date or $2.5 million for the immediately preceding period of twelve consecutive monthly payment dates. This ceiling can be increased by the lesser of 5.0% or the percentage increase in the fair market value of all the Company’s assets only on the first monthly payment date to occur after each one-year anniversary following the closing of the Replacement Facility. Upon the occurrence of a Manager Event (described below), the consent of the administrative agent is required in order to pay operating expenses through the priority of payments provision.
Events of Default. The Replacement Facility contains certain negative covenants, customary representations and warranties and affirmative covenants and events of default. The Replacement Facility does not contain grace periods for breach by the Company of certain covenants, including, without limitation, preservation of existence, negative pledge, change of name or jurisdiction and separate legal entity status of the Company covenants and certain other customary covenants. Other events of default under the Replacement Facility include, among other things, the following:
· an Interest Coverage Ratio of less than 150.0%;
· an Overcollateralization Ratio of less than 175.0%;
· the filing of certain ERISA or tax liens;
· the occurrence of certain “Manager Events” such as:
· failure by Saratoga Investment Advisors and its affiliates to maintain collectively, directly or indirectly, a cash equity investment in the Company in an amount equal to at least $5,000,000 at any time prior to the third anniversary of the closing date;
· failure of the management agreement between Saratoga Investment Advisors and the Company to be in full force and effect;
· indictment or conviction of Saratoga Investment Advisors or any “key person” for a felony offense, or any fraud, embezzlement or misappropriation of funds by Saratoga Investment Advisors or any “key person” and, in the case of “key persons,” without a reputable, experienced individual reasonably satisfactory to Madison Capital Funding appointed to replace such key person within 30 days;
· resignation, termination, disability or death of a “key person” or failure of any “key person” to provide active participation in Saratoga Investment Advisors’ daily activities, all without a reputable,
experienced individual reasonably satisfactory to Madison Capital Funding appointed within 30 days; or
· occurrence of any event constituting “cause” under the Collateral Management Agreement between the Company and Saratoga CLO (the “CLO Management Agreement”), delivery of a notice under Section 12(c) of the CLO Management Agreement with respect to the removal of the Company as collateral manager or the Company ceases to act as collateral manager under the CLO Management Agreement
Conditions to Acquisitions and Pledges of Loan Assets. The Replacement Facility imposes certain additional conditions to the acquisition and pledge of additional loan assets. Among other things, the Company may not acquire additional loan assets without the prior written consent of the administrative agent until such time that the administrative agent indicates in writing its satisfaction with Saratoga Investment Advisors’ policies, personnel and processes relating to the loan assets.
Fees and Expenses. The Company paid certain fees and reimbursed Madison Capital Funding for the aggregate amount of all documented, out-of-pocket costs and expenses, including the reasonable fees and expenses of lawyers, incurred by Madison Capital Funding in connection with the Replacement Facility and the carrying out of any and all acts contemplated thereunder up to and as of the date of closing of the stock purchase transaction with Saratoga Investment Advisors and certain of its affiliates. These amounts totaled $2.0 million.
On February 24, 2012, we amended our senior secured revolving credit facility with Madison Capital Funding LLC to, among other things:
· expand the borrowing capacity under the credit facility from $40.0 million to $45.0 million;
· extend the Revolving Period from July 30, 2013 to February 24, 2015; and
· remove the condition that we may not acquire additional loan assets without the prior written consent of the administrative agent.
As of February 28, 2013, we had $24.3 million outstanding under the Replacement Facility and $36.0 million SBA-guaranteed debentures outstanding (which are discussed below). Our borrowing base under the Replacement Facility was $35.7 million at February 28, 2013.
Our asset coverage ratio, as defined in the 1940 Act, was 547.0% and 587.0% for the years ended February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, respectively.
At February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, the fair value of investments, cash and cash equivalents and cash and cash equivalents, securitization accounts were as follows:
On November 9, 2012, our board of directors declared a dividend of $4.25 per share payable on December 31, 2012, to common stockholders of record on November 20, 2012. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to approximately $3.3 million or $0.85 per share.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of $3.3 million in cash and 853,455 shares of common stock, or 22.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 20.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $15.444 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 14, 17 and 19, 2012.
On November 15, 2011, our board of directors declared a dividend of $3.00 per share payable on December 30, 2011, to common stockholders of record on November 25, 2011. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to $2.0 million or $0.60 per share.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of $2.0 million in cash and 599,584 shares of common stock, or 18.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 20.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $13.117067 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 20, 21 and 22, 2011.
On November 12, 2010, our board of directors declared a dividend of $4.40 per share to shareholders payable in cash or shares of our common stock, in accordance with the provisions of the IRS Revenue Procedure 2010-12, which allows a publicly-traded regulated investment company to satisfy its distribution requirements with a distribution paid partly in common stock provided that at least 10.0% of the distribution is payable in cash. The dividend was paid on December 29, 2010 to common shareholders of record on November 19, 2010.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of $1.2 million in cash and 596,235 shares of common stock, or 22.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 10.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $17.8049 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 20, 21 and 22, 2010.
On November 13, 2009, our board of directors declared a dividend of $18.25 per share payable on December 31, 2009, to common stockholders of record on November 25, 2009. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash,
shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to $2.1 million or $0.25 per share.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of $2.1 million in cash and 8,648,725 shares of common stock, or 104.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 13.7% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $1.5099 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 24 and 28, 2009.
We intend to continue to generate cash primarily from cash flows from operations, including interest earned from the temporary investment of cash in U.S. government securities and other high-quality debt investments that mature in one year or less, future borrowings and future offerings of securities.
Although we expect to fund the growth of our investment portfolio through the net proceeds from future equity offerings, including our dividend reinvestment plan, and issuances of senior securities or future borrowings, to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act, our plans to raise capital may not be successful. In this regard, because our common stock has at times traded at a price below our then-current net asset value per share and we are limited in our ability to sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share, we may be limited in our ability to raise equity capital. Our stockholders approved a proposal at our annual meeting of stockholders held on September 28, 2012 that authorizes us to sell shares of our common stock at not less than 85% of the then current net asset value per share in one or more offerings for a period ending on the earlier of September 28, 2013 or the date of our next annual meeting of stockholders. We would need stockholder approval of a similar proposal to issue shares below net asset value per share at any time after our next annual meeting of stockholders.
In addition, we intend to distribute to our stockholders substantially all of our taxable income in order to satisfy the distribution requirement applicable to RICs under Subchapter M of the Code. In satisfying this distribution requirement, we have in the past relied on IRS issued private letter rulings concluding that a RIC may treat a distribution of its own stock as fulfilling its RIC distribution requirements if each stockholder may elect to receive his or her entire distribution in either cash or stock of the RIC subject to a limitation on the aggregate amount of cash to be distributed to all stockholders, which limitation must be at least 20.0% of the aggregate declared distribution. We may rely on these IRS private letter rulings in future periods to satisfy our RIC distribution requirement.
Also, as a BDC, we generally are required to meet a coverage ratio of total assets, less liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, to total senior securities, which include all of our borrowings and any outstanding preferred stock, of at least 200.0%. This requirement limits the amount that we may borrow. To fund growth in our investment portfolio in the future, we anticipate needing to raise additional capital from various sources, including the equity markets and other debt-related markets, which may or may not be available on favorable terms, if at all.
Consequently, we may not have the funds or the ability to fund new investments, to make additional investments in our portfolio companies, to fund our unfunded commitments to portfolio companies or to repay borrowings. Also, the illiquidity of our portfolio investments may make it difficult for us to sell these investments when desired and, if we are required to sell these investments, we may realize significantly less than their recorded value.
Finally, we, through a wholly-owned subsidiary, sought and obtained a license from the SBA to operate an SBIC. In this regard, on March 28, 2012, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Saratoga Investment Corp. SBIC, LP, received a license from the SBA to operate as an SBIC under Section 301(c) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958. SBICs are designated to stimulate the flow of private equity capital to eligible small businesses. Under SBA regulations, SBICs may make loans to eligible small businesses and invest in the equity securities of small businesses.
The SBIC license allows our SBIC subsidiary to obtain leverage by issuing SBA-guaranteed debentures, subject to the issuance of a capital commitment by the SBA and other customary procedures. SBA-guaranteed debentures are non-recourse, interest only debentures with interest payable semi-annually and have a ten year maturity. The principal amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures is not required to be paid prior to maturity but may be prepaid at any time without penalty. The interest rate of SBA-guaranteed debentures is fixed on a semi-annual basis at a market-driven spread over U.S. Treasury Notes with 10-year maturities.
SBA regulations currently limit the amount that our SBIC subsidiary may borrow to a maximum of $150.0 million when it has at least $75.0 million in regulatory capital, receives a capital commitment from the SBA and has been through an examination by the SBA subsequent to licensing. As of February 28, 2013, our SBIC subsidiary had $25.0 million in regulatory capital and $36.0 million SBA-guaranteed debentures outstanding.
We received exemptive relief from the SEC to permit us to exclude the debt of our SBIC subsidiary guaranteed by the SBA from our 200.0% asset coverage test under the 1940 Act. This allows us increased flexibility under the 200.0% asset coverage test by permitting us to borrow up to $150.0 million more than we would otherwise be able to absent the receipt of this exemptive relief.
We cannot provide any assurance that these measures will provide sufficient sources of liquidity to support our operations and growth.
Contractual obligations
The following table shows our payment obligations for repayment of debt and other contractual obligations at February 28, 2013:
Off-balance sheet arrangements
At February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, we did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that are material to investors.
Recent Developments
In May 2013, we issued $48.3 million in aggregate principal amount of our 7.50% unsecured notes due 2020 for net proceeds of $46.1 million after deducting underwriting commissions of $1.9 million and offering costs of $0.3 million. The proceeds included the underwriters’ full exercise of their overallotment option. Interest on these notes is paid quarterly in arrears on February 15, May 15, August 15 and November 15, at a rate of 7.5% per year, beginning August 15, 2013. The notes mature on May 31, 2020 and may be redeemed in whole or in part at any time or from time to time at our option on or after May 31, 2016. The notes are listed on the NYSE under the trading symbol “SAQ” with a par value of $25.00 per share.
Item 7A.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Our business activities contain elements of market risk. We consider our principal market risk to be the fluctuation in interest rates. Managing this risk is essential to our business. Accordingly, we have systems and procedures designed to identify and analyze our risks, to establish appropriate policies and thresholds and to continually monitor this risk and thresholds by means of administrative and information technology systems and other policies and processes.
Interest rate risk is defined as the sensitivity of our current and future earnings to interest rate volatility, including relative changes in different interest rates, variability of spread relationships, the difference in re-pricing intervals between our assets and liabilities and the effect that interest rates may have on our cash flows. Changes in the general level of interest rates can affect our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income earned on interest earning assets and our interest expense incurred in connection with our interest bearing debt and liabilities. Changes in interest rates can also affect, among other things, our ability to acquire leveraged loans, high yield bonds and other debt investments and the value of our investment portfolio.
Our investment income is affected by fluctuations in various interest rates, including LIBOR and the prime rate. A large portion of our portfolio is, and we expect will continue to be, comprised of floating rate investments that utilize LIBOR. Our interest expense is affected by fluctuations in LIBOR. At February 28, 2013, we had $60.3 million of borrowings outstanding.
We have analyzed the potential impact of changes in interest rates on interest income from investments net of interest expense on the Replacement Facility. Assuming that our investments as of February 28, 2013 were to remain constant for a full fiscal year and no actions were taken to alter the existing interest rate terms, a hypothetical change of 1.0% in interest rates would cause a corresponding increase of approximately $0.1 million to our interest income net of interest expense.
Although management believes that this measure is indicative of our sensitivity to interest rate changes, it does not adjust for potential changes in credit quality, size and composition of the assets on the statement of assets and liabilities and other business developments that could magnify or diminish our sensitivity to interest rate changes, nor does it account for divergences in LIBOR and the commercial paper rate, which have historically moved in tandem but, in times of unusual credit dislocations, have experienced periods of divergence. Accordingly no assurances can be given that actual results would not materially differ from the potential outcome simulated by this estimate.
ITEM 8.
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Our financial statements are annexed to this Annual Report beginning on page.
ITEM 9.
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
None
ITEM 9A.
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures
Our CEO and our CFO have evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) of the Exchange Act) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based upon that evaluation, our CEO and CFO have concluded that our current disclosure controls and procedures are effective as of the end of the period covered by this report.
Management’s annual report on internal control over financial reporting
The Company’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined by Rule 13a-15(f) of the Exchange Act) and for the assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of the consolidated financial statements. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements and even when determined to be effective, can only provide reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Under the supervision and with the participation of management, including the CEO and CFO, the Company conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on the criteria established in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on the Company’s assessment, management believes that the Company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of February 28, 2013.
Changes in internal controls over financial reporting
There have been no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of Exchange Act) that occurred during our most recently completed fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
ITEM 9B.
ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
PART III
ITEM 10.
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Director and Executive Officer Information
Directors
The following table sets forth the names, ages and positions held by each of our directors, followed by a brief biography of each individual, including the business experience of each individual during the past five years and the specific qualifications that led to the conclusion that each individual should serve as a director.
Christian L. Oberbeck-Mr. Oberbeck has over 25 years of experience in leveraged finance, from distressed debt to private equity, and has been involved in originating, structuring, negotiating, consummating, managing and monitoring investments in these businesses. Mr. Oberbeck is the Managing Partner of Saratoga Partners, a middle market private equity investment firm, and has served on its investment committee since 1995. Mr. Oberbeck is also the Managing Member of Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC, the Company’s investment adviser, and the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Mr. Oberbeck also served as our President until February 2013.
Prior to assuming management responsibility for Saratoga Partners in 2008, Mr. Oberbeck has co-managed Saratoga Partners since 1995, when he joined Dillon Read and Saratoga Partners from Castle Harlan, Inc., a corporate buyout firm which he had joined at its founding in 1987 and was a Managing Director, leading successful investments in manufacturing and financial services companies. Prior to that, he worked in the Corporate Development Group of Arthur Young and in corporate finance at Blyth Eastman Paine Webber. Mr. Oberbeck has been a director of numerous middle market companies.
Mr. Oberbeck graduated from Brown University in 1982 with a BS in Physics and a BA in Mathematics. In 1985, he earned an MBA from Columbia University. Mr. Oberbeck’s qualifications as a director include his extensive experience in the investment and finance industry, as well as his intimate knowledge of the Company’s operations, gained through his service as an executive officer.
Michael J. Grisius-Mr. Grisius has over 22 years of experience in leveraged finance, investment management and financial services. He has originated, structured, negotiated, consummated, managed and monitored numerous successful investments in mezzanine debt, private equity, senior debt, structured products and commercial real estate debt. Mr. Grisius is Chief Investment Officer and a Managing Director of Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC, the Company’s investment adviser, and was appointed President of the Company in February 2013. Mr. Grisius joined Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC in July 2011.
Prior to joining Saratoga Investment Advisors, Mr. Grisius served as Managing Director at Allied Capital Corporation, where he was an investment professional for 16 years. At Allied Capital Corporation, Mr. Grisius held several senior positions including co-head of Mezzanine Finance and member of its Management Committee and its Investment Committee. In 2008, Mr. Grisius was appointed co-chairman of the Allied Capital Corporation’s Investment Committee. He also had responsibility for structuring and managing Unitranche Fund, LLC. During his tenure at Allied, Mr. Grisius built and led teams that made investments in subordinated debt, control equity and real estate mortgage debt. Mr. Grisius has served on the board of directors of numerous middle market companies. Prior to joining Allied Capital Corp., Mr. Grisius worked in leveraged finance at Chemical Bank from 1989 to 1992 and held senior accountant and consultant positions with KPMG LLP from 1985 to 1988.
Mr. Grisius graduated with a BS from Georgetown University in 1985 and earned an MBA from Cornell University’s Johnson Graduate School of Management in 1990. Mr. Grisius’ qualifications as a director include his broad experience in leverage finance, investment management, private equity and financial services.
Steven M. Looney-Mr. Looney is a Managing Director of Peale Davies & Co. Inc., a consulting firm with particular expertise in financial process and IT outsourcing, and is a CPA and an attorney. Mr. Looney also serves as a consultant and director to numerous companies in the healthcare, manufacturing and technology services industries, including WH Industries Inc. Between 2000 and 2005, he served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of PCCI, Inc., a private IT staffing and outsourcing firm. Between 1992 and 2000, Mr. Looney worked at WH Industries as Chief Financial and Administrative Officer. Mr. Looney also serves as a director of Excellent Education for Everyone, a nonprofit organization. Mr. Looney graduated summa cum laude from the University of Washington with a B.A. degree in Accounting and received a J.D. from the University of Washington School of Law where he was a member of the law review. Mr. Looney’s qualifications as director include his experience as a Managing Director of Peale Davies & Co. Inc. and as Chief Financial and Administrative Officer of WH Industries, as well as his financial, accounting and legal expertise.
Charles S. Whitman III-Mr. Whitman is senior counsel (retired) at Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP. Mr. Whitman was a partner in Davis Polk’s Corporate Department for 28 years, representing clients in a broad range of corporate finance matters, including shelf registrations, securities compliance for financial institutions, foreign asset privatizations, and mergers and acquisitions. From 1971 to 1973, Mr. Whitman served as Executive Assistant to three successive Chairmen of the SEC. Mr. Whitman graduated from Harvard College and graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School with a LL.B. Mr. Whitman also received an LL.M. from Cambridge University in England. Mr. Whitman’s qualifications as director include his 28 years of experience representing clients, including AT&T, Exxon Mobil, General Motors and BP, in securities matters as a partner in Davis Polk’s corporate department.
G. Cabell Williams-Mr. Williams has served as the Managing General Partner of Williams and Gallagher, a private equity partnership located in Chevy Chase, Maryland since 2004. Mr Williams is also a Senior Manager, Director of Farragut Capital Partners which is a Chevy Chase, Maryland based Mezzanine Fund. Since 2011, Mr. Williams has also served as a partner of Farragut Capital Partners, an investment firm based in Fairfax, VA. In 2004, Mr. Williams concluded a 23 year career at Allied Capital Corporation, a business development company based in Washington, DC, which was acquired by Ares Capital Corporation in 2010. While at Allied, Mr. Williams held a variety of positions, including President, COO and finally Managing Director following Allied’s merger with its affiliates in 1998. From 1991 to 2004, Mr. Williams either led or co-managed the firm’s Private Equity Group. For the nine years prior to 1999, Mr. Williams led Allied’s Mezzanine investment activities. For 15 years, Mr. Williams served on Allied’s Investment Committee where he was responsible for reviewing and approving all of the firm’s investments. Prior to 1991, Mr. Williams ran Allied’s Minority Small Business Investment Company. He also founded Allied Capital Commercial Corporation, a real estate investment vehicle. Mr. Williams has served on the Board of various public and private companies. Mr. Williams attended The Landon School, and graduated from Mercersburg Academy and Rollins College, receiving a B.S. in Business Administration from the latter. Mr. Williams’ qualifications as director include his 28 years of experience managing investment activities at Allied Capital, where he served in a variety of positions, including President, COO and Managing Director.
Executive Officer Who Is Not also a Director
The following table sets forth the name, age and position held by our executive officer who is not also a director, followed by a brief biography, including the business experience during the past five years.
Richard A. Petrocelli-Mr. Petrocelli has over 20 years of experience including investment management, private equity and corporate reorganizations. Mr. Petrocelli is a Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer at Saratoga Partners, a middle market private equity investment firm, and has been involved in originating, structuring, negotiating, consummating, managing and monitoring middle market investments. Mr. Petrocelli is the Managing Director of Saratoga Investment Advisors, the Company’s investment adviser, and the Chief Financial Officer, Vice President, Secretary and Chief Compliance Officer of the Company. Mr. Petrocelli served as a director of the Company from 2010 until 2011.
Mr. Petrocelli began his career as an accountant before transitioning to alternative assets at Gabelli Asset Management Company in 1993. Mr. Petrocelli’s background brings financial expertise to the diligence and oversight processes, which is critically important when dealing in complex transactions. In addition to his involvement in originating, structuring, negotiating, consummating,
managing and monitoring investments at Saratoga Partners, Mr. Petrocelli is currently the Chief Financial Officer of Saratoga Partners and is responsible for reporting and compliance. Mr. Petrocelli joined Saratoga Partners in 1998 from Gabelli Asset Management. At Gabelli Asset Management, Mr. Petrocelli was a Vice President in the corporate finance department with a primary focus on the Company’s alternative investment business. Prior to that, he was a senior accountant at BDO Siedman. Mr. Petrocelli has served as a director of a number of Saratoga Partners’ portfolio companies.
Mr. Petrocelli graduated with a BSBA from Georgetown University in 1990 and earned an MBA from New York University’s Stern School of Business in 1999. He is a Certified Public Accountant.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires our directors and executive officers, and persons who own 10.0% or more of our voting stock, to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership of our equity securities with the SEC. Directors, executive officers and 10.0% or more holders are required by SEC regulations to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) forms they file. Based solely on a review of the copies of those forms furnished to us, or written representations that no such forms were required, we believe that our directors, executive officers and 10.0% or more beneficial owners complied with all Section 16(a) filing requirements during the year ended February 28, 2013.
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics
We have adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to which applies to, among others, our executive officers, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as well as every officer, director and employee of the Company. Requests for copies should be sent in writing to Saratoga Investment Corp., 535 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10022. The Company’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is also available on our website at http://saratogainvestmentcorp.com.
If we make any substantive amendment to, or grant a waiver from, a provision of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, we will promptly disclose the nature of the amendment or waiver on our website at http://saratogainvestmentcorp.com.
Nomination of Directors
There have been no material changes to the procedures by which stockholders may recommend nominees to our Board of Directors implemented since the filing of our Proxy Statement for our 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
Audit Committee
The current members of the audit committee are Steven M. Looney (Chairman), Charles S. Whitman III and G. Cabell Williams. The Board has determined that Mr. Looney is an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under Item 407 of Regulation S-K of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that each of Messrs. Whitman and Williams are “financially literate” as required by NYSE corporate governance standards. All of these members are independent directors.
ITEM 11.
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Executive Compensation
Currently, none of our executive officers are compensated by us. We currently have no employees, and each of our executive officers is also an employee of Saratoga Investment Advisors. Services necessary for our business are provided by individuals who are employees of Saratoga Investment Advisors, pursuant to the terms of an investment advisory and management agreement and an administration agreement.
Director Compensation
Our independent directors receive an annual fee of $40,000. They also receive $2,500 plus reimbursement of reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with attending each board meeting and receive $1,000 plus reimbursement of reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with attending each committee meeting. In addition, the chairman of the audit committee receives an annual fee of $5,000 and the chairman of each other committee receives an annual fee of $2,000 for their additional services in these capacities. In addition, we have purchased directors’ and officers’ liability insurance on behalf of our directors and officers. Independent directors have the option to receive their directors’ fees in the form of our common stock issued at
a price per share equal to the greater of net asset value or the market price at the time of payment. No compensation is paid to directors who are “interested persons.”
The following table sets forth information concerning total compensation earned by or paid to each of our directors during the fiscal year ended February 28, 2013:
(1) No compensation was paid to directors who are interested persons of us as defined in the 1940 Act.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
The current members of the compensation committee are G. Cabell Williams (Chairman), Steven M. Looney and Charles S. Whitman III. All of these members are independent directors. The compensation committee is responsible for overseeing the Company’s compensation policies generally and making recommendations to the Board with respect to incentive compensation and equity-based plans of the Company that are subject to Board approval, evaluating executive officer performance and reviewing the Company’s management succession plan, overseeing and setting compensation for the Company’s directors and, as applicable, its executive officers and, as applicable, preparing the report on executive officer compensation that SEC rules require to be included in our annual report on Form 10-K. Currently, none of our executive officers are compensated by the Company and as such the compensation committee is not required to produce a report on executive officer compensation for inclusion in our annual report on Form 10-K.
During fiscal year 2013, none of the Company’s executive officers served on the board of directors (or a compensation committee thereof or other board committee performing equivalent functions) of any entities that had one or more executive officers serve on the compensation committee or on the board of directors. No current or past executive officers or employees of the Company or its affiliates serve on the compensation committee.
ITEM 12.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
The following table sets forth, as of May XX, 2013, the beneficial ownership of each current director, the nominees for director, the Company’s executive officers, each person known to us to beneficially own 5.0% or more of the outstanding shares of our common stock, and the executive officers and directors as a group.
The percentage ownership is based on 4,730,116 shares of common stock outstanding as of May 28, 2013. Shares of common stock that are subject to warrants or other convertible securities currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days thereof, are deemed outstanding for the purposes of computing the percentage ownership of the person holding these options or convertible securities, but are not deemed outstanding for computing the percentage ownership of any other person. Beneficial ownership is determined under the rules of the SEC and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities. To our knowledge, unless otherwise indicated in the footnotes to this table, the persons and entities named in the table have sole voting and sole investment power with respect to all shares beneficially owned. Unless otherwise indicated by footnote, the address for each listed individual is Saratoga Investment Corp., 535 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10022.
* Less than 1.0%
(1) Includes 1,039,188 shares of common stock directly held by Mr. Oberbeck, 154,261 shares of common stock held by Saratoga Investment Advisors, which Mr. Oberbeck controls, and 148,540 shares of common stock held by CLO Partners LLC, an entity wholly owned by Mr. Oberbeck.
(2) Based on Amendment No. 1 to Schedule 13G filed on February 14, 2013 by Black Diamond Capital Management, L.L.C and Stephen H. Deckoff. Mr. Deckoff is the Managing Principal of Black Diamond Capital Management, L.L.C. The address of Black Diamond Capital Management, L.L.C. is One Sound Shore Drive, Suite 200, Greenwich, CT 06830.
(3) Based on Amendment No.2 to Schedule 13G filed on January 3, 2013. Raging Capital Management, LLC (‘‘Raging Capital’’) is the investment manager of Raging Capital Master Fund, Ltd. William C. Martin is the managing member of Raging Capital. By virtue of these relationships, Raging Capital and Mr. Martin may be deemed to beneficially own our common stock owned directly by the Raging Capital Master Fund, Ltd. The address of Raging Capital Master Fund, Ltd. is Ten Princeton Avenue, Rocky Hill, NJ 08553.
(4) Based on Amendment No. 1 to Schedule 13G filed on February 14, 2013 by Magten Asset Management Corp. and Talton R. Embry. Mr. Embry is the Managing Director of Magten Asset Management Corp. The address of Magten Asset Management Corp. is 17 East 89th Street, New York, NY 10128.
ITEM 13.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
Transactions with Related Persons
We have entered into an investment advisory and management agreement with Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC. We have also entered into a license agreement with Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC, pursuant to which Saratoga Investment Advisors has agreed to grant us a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the name “Saratoga.” In addition, pursuant to the terms of the administration agreement, Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC provides us with the office facilities and administrative services necessary to conduct our day-to-day operations. Mr. Oberbeck, our chief executive officer, is the primary investor in and controls Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC.
Review, Approval or Ratification of Transactions with Related Persons
The Audit Committee of our Board is required to review and approve any transactions with related persons (as such term is defined in Item 404 of Regulation S-K).
Director Independence
In accordance with rules of the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”), the Board annually determines the independence of each director. No director is considered independent unless the Board has determined that he or she has no material relationship with the Company. The Company monitors the status of its directors and officers through the activities of the Company’s Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and through a questionnaire to be completed by each director no less frequently than annually, with updates periodically if information provided in the most recent questionnaire has changed.
In order to evaluate the materiality of any such relationship, the Board uses the definition of director independence set forth in the NYSE Listed Company Manual. Section 303A.00 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual provides that business development companies, or BDCs, such as the Company, are required to comply with all of the provisions of Section 303A applicable to domestic issuers other than Sections 303A.02, the section that defines director independence.
Section 303A.00 provides that a director of a BDC shall be considered to be independent if he or she is not an “interested person” of the Company, as defined in Section 2(a)(19) of the 1940 Act. Section 2(a)(19) of the 1940 Act defines an “interested person” to include, among other things, any person who has, or within the last two years had, a material business or professional relationship with the Company.
The Board has determined that each of the directors is independent and has no relationship with the Company, except as a director and stockholder of the Company, with the exception of Messrs. Oberbeck and Grisius who are interested persons of the Company due to their positions as officers of the Company and its investment adviser.
ITEM 14.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
For the years ended February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, the Company incurred the following fees for services provided by Ernst & Young LLP, including expenses:
Audit Fees. Audit fees include fees for services that normally would be provided by the accountant in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements and that generally only the independent accountant can provide. In addition to fees for the audit of our annual financial statements, the audit of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and the review of our quarterly financial statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, this category contains fees for comfort letters, statutory audits, consents, and assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC.
Audit Related Fees. Audit related fees are assurance related services that traditionally are performed by the independent accountant, such as attest services that are not required by statute or regulation.
Tax Fees. Tax fees include services in conjunction with preparation of the Company’s tax return.
All Other Fees. Fees for other services would include fees for products and services other than the services reported above.
It is the policy of the audit committee to pre-approve all audit, review or attest engagements and permissible non-audit services to be performed by our independent registered public accounting firm.
PART IV
ITEM 15.
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
The following documents are filed or incorporated by reference as part of this Annual Report:
1. Consolidated Financial Statements
The following financial statements of the Company are filed herewith:
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Consolidated Statements of Assets and Liabilities as of February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011
Consolidated Schedules of Investments as of February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Net Assets for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
2. Financial Statement Schedule
Not applicable.
Schedule 12-14-Investments in and advances to affiliates
3. Exhibits required to be filed by Item 601 of Regulation S-K
The following exhibits are filed as part of this report or hereby incorporated by reference to exhibits previously filed with the SEC:
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit
Number
Description
3.1(a)
Articles of Incorporation of Saratoga Investment Corp. (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 31, 2007, File No. 001-33376).
3.1(b)
Articles of Amendment of Saratoga Investment Corp. (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed August 3, 2010).
3.1(c)
Articles of Amendment of Saratoga Investment Corp. (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed August 13, 2010).
3.2
Amended and Restated Bylaws of Saratoga Investment Corp. (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on March 5, 2008).
4.1
Specimen certificate of Saratoga Investment Corp.’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share. (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Registration Statement on Form N-2, File No. 333-169135, filed on September 1, 2010).
4.2
Registration Rights Agreement dated July 30, 2010 between GSC Investment Corp., GSC CDO III L.L.C., and the investors party thereto (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August 3, 2010).
4.3
Form of Dividend Reinvestment Plan (incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 2 to the Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Registration Statement on Form N-2, File No. 333-138051, filed on January 12, 2007).
4.4
Form of Indenture by and between the Company and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Pre-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form N-2, File No. 333-186323 filed April 30, 2013).
4.5
Form of First Supplemental Indenture between the Company and U.S. Bank National Association (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Pre-Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form N-2, File No. 333-186323 filed April 30, 2013).
4.6
Form of Note (Filed as Exhibit A to First Supplemental Indenture referred to in Exhibit 4.5).
10.1
Investment Advisory and Management Agreement dated July 30, 2010 between GSC Investment Corp. and Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August 3, 2010).
10.2
Custodian Agreement dated March 21, 2007 between GSC Investment LLC and U.S. Bank National Association (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended May 31, 2007).
10.3
Administration Agreement dated July 30, 2010 between GSC Investment Corp. and Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August 3, 2010).
10.4
Trademark License Agreement dated July 30, 2010 between Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC and GSC Investment Corp. (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August 3, 2010).
10.5
Credit, Security and Management Agreement dated July 30, 2010 by and among GSC Investment Funding LLC, Saratoga Investment Corp., Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC, Madison Capital Funding LLC and U.S. Bank National Association (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August 3, 2010).
10.6
Form of Indemnification Agreement between Saratoga Investment Corp. and each officer and director of Saratoga Investment Corp. (incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 2 to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Registration Statement on Form N-2 filed on January 12, 2007).
10.7
Amendment No. 1 to Credit, Security and Management Agreement dated February 24, 2012 by and among Saratoga Investment Funding LLC, Saratoga Investment Corp., Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC, Madison Capital Funding LLC and U.S. Bank National Association (incorporated by reference to Saratoga Investment Corp.’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on February 29, 2012).
10.8
Indenture, dated as of January 22, 2008, among GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007, Ltd., GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007, Inc. and U.S. Bank National Association (incorporated by reference to the registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-2, File No. 333-186323, filed on April 30, 2013).
12.1
Statement of Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges (incorporated by reference to the registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-2, File No. 333-186323, filed on April 29, 2013).
21.1
List of Subsidiaries and jurisdiction of incorporation/organization: Saratoga Investment Funding LLC-Delaware; Saratoga Investment Corp. SBIC, LP-Delaware; and Saratoga Investment Corp. GP, LLC-Delaware.
31.1*
Chief Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2*
Chief Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.1**
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Certification pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
* Filed herewith
** To be filed by amendment.
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.
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENT, that each person whose signature appears below hereby constitutes and appoints Christian L. Oberbeck and Richard A. Petrocelli, and each of them (with full power to each of them to act alone), his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place, and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign this report and any and all amendments thereto, and to file the same, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or their substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature
Title
Date
/s/ CHRISTIAN L. OBERBECK
Chairman of the Board of Directors, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
May 29, 2013
Christian L. Oberbeck
/s/ MICHAEL J. GRISIUS
Member of the Board of Directors
May 29, 2013
Michael J. Grisius
/s/ RICHARD A. PETROCELLI
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
May 29, 2013
Richard A. Petrocelli
/s/ STEVEN M. LOONEY
Member of the Board of Directors
May 29, 2013
Steven M. Looney
/s/ CHARLES S. WHITMAN III
Member of the Board of Directors
May 29, 2013
Charles S. Whitman III
/s/ G. CABELL WILLIAMS
Member of the Board of Directors
May 29, 2013
Cabell Williams
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Consolidated Statements of Assets and Liabilities as of February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011
Consolidated Schedules of Investments as of February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Net Assets for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Saratoga Investment Corp.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated statements of assets and liabilities of Saratoga Investment Corp (the “Company”), including the consolidated schedules of investments, as of February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in net assets and cash flows for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. We were not engaged to perform an audit of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of February 28, 2013, by correspondence with the custodian and management or agents of the underlying investments. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Saratoga Investment Corp. at February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, and the consolidated results of its operations, changes in its net assets and its cash flows for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
New York, NY
May 29, 2013
Saratoga Investment Corp.
Consolidated Statements of Assets and Liabilities
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
Saratoga Investment Corp.
Consolidated Statements of Operations
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
Saratoga Investment Corp.
Consolidated Schedule of Investments
February 28, 2013
(a)
All of our equity and debt investments are issued by eligible portfolio companies, as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, except GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007 Ltd. and GSC Partners CDO GP III, LP.
(b)
Percentages are based on net assets of $108,686,761 as of February 28, 2013.
(c)
Because there is no readily available market value for these investments, the fair value of these investments is approved in good faith by our board of directors. (see Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements).
(d)
These securities are pledged as collateral under a senior secured revolving credit facility (see Note 6 to the consolidated financial statements).
(e)
23.06% represents the modeled effective interest rate that is expected to be earned over the life of the investment.
(f)
As defined in the Investment Company Act, we are an “Affiliate” of this portfolio company because we own 5% or more of the portfolio company’s outstanding voting securities. Transactions during the period in which the issuer was an Affiliate are as follows:
(g)
As defined in the Investment Company Act, we “Control” this portfolio company because we own more than 25% of the portfolio company’s outstanding voting securities. Transactions during the period in which the issuer was both an Affiliate and a portfolio company that we Control are as follows:
(h)
Non-income producing at February 28, 2013.
Saratoga Investment Corp.
Consolidated Schedule of Investments
February 29, 2012
* Amounts to less than 0.05%
(a) All of our equity and debt investments are issued by eligible portfolio companies, as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, except GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007 Ltd. and GSC Partners CDO GP III, LP.
(b) Percentages are based on net assets of $97,380,150 as of February 29, 2012.
(c) Because there is no readily available market value for these investments, the fair value of these investments is approved in good faith by our board of directors. (see Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements).
(d) These securities are pledged as collateral under a senior secured revolving credit facility (see Note 6 to the consolidated financial statements).
(e) 17.38% represents the modeled effective interest rate that is expected to be earned over the life of the investment.
(f) As defined in the Investment Company Act, we are an “Affiliate” of this portfolio company because we own 5.0% or more of the portfolio company’s outstanding voting securities. Transactions during the period in which the issuer was an Affiliate are as follows:
(g) As defined in the Investment Company Act, we “Control” this portfolio company because we own more than 25.0% of the portfolio company’s outstanding voting securities. Transactions during the period in which the issuer was both an Affiliate and a portfolio company that we Control are as follows:
(h) Non-income producing at February 29, 2012.
Saratoga Investment Corp.
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Net Assets
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
Saratoga Investment Corp.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
SARATOGA INVESTMENT CORP.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
February 28, 2013
Note 1. Organization and Basis of Presentation
Saratoga Investment Corp. (the “Company”, “we”, “our” and “us”) is a non-diversified closed end management investment company incorporated in Maryland that has elected to be treated and is regulated as a business development company (“BDC”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”). We commenced operations on March 23, 2007 as GSC Investment Corp. and completed our initial public offering (“IPO”) on March 28, 2007. We have elected to be treated as a regulated investment company (“RIC”) under subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). We expect to continue to qualify and to elect to be treated for tax purposes as a RIC. Our investment objective is to generate current income and, to a lesser extent, capital appreciation from our investments.
GSC Investment, LLC (the “LLC”) was organized in May 2006 as a Maryland limited liability company. As of February 28, 2007, the LLC had not yet commenced its operations and investment activities.
On March 21, 2007, the Company was incorporated and concurrently therewith the LLC was merged with and into the Company, with the Company as the surviving entity, in accordance with the procedure for such merger in the LLC’s limited liability company agreement and Maryland law. In connection with such merger, each outstanding limited liability company interest of the LLC was converted into a share of common stock of the Company.
On July 30, 2010, the Company changed its name from “GSC Investment Corp.” to “Saratoga Investment Corp.” in conjunction with the transaction described in “Note 13. Recapitalization Transaction” below.
We are externally managed and advised by our investment adviser, Saratoga Investment Advisors, LLC (the “Manager”), pursuant to an investment advisory and management agreement. Prior to July 30, 2010, we were managed and advised by GSCP (NJ), L.P.
On March 28, 2012, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Saratoga Investment Corp. SBIC, LP (“SBIC LP”), received a Small Business Investment Company (“SBIC”) license from the Small Business Administration (“SBA”).
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the accrual basis of accounting in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) and include the accounts of the Company and its special purpose financing subsidiary, Saratoga Investment Funding, LLC (previously known as GSC Investment Funding LLC). All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. All references made to the “Company,” “we,” and “us” herein include Saratoga Investment Corp. and its consolidated subsidiary, except as stated otherwise.
Note 2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements
The preparation of the accompanying consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and income, gains (losses) and expenses during the period reported. Actual results could differ materially from those estimates.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include short-term, liquid investments in a money market fund. Cash and cash equivalents are carried at cost which approximates fair value. Per section 12(d)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act, the Company may not invest in another registered investment company such as, a money market fund if such investment would cause the Company to exceed any of the following limitations:
· we were to own more than 3.0% of the total outstanding voting stock of the money market fund;
· we were to hold securities in the money market fund having an aggregate value in excess of 5.0% of the value of our total assets; or
· we were to hold securities in money market funds and other registered investment companies and BDCs having an aggregate value in excess of 10.0% of the value of our total assets.
Cash and Cash Equivalents, Reserve Accounts
Cash and cash equivalents, reserve accounts include amounts held in designated bank accounts in the form of cash and short-term liquid investments in money market funds representing payments received on secured investments or other reserved amounts associated with our $45.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility with Madison Capital Funding LLC. The Company is required to use these amounts to pay interest expense, reduce borrowings, or pay other amounts in accordance with the terms of the senior secured revolving credit facility.
Investment Classification
The Company classifies its investments in accordance with the requirements of the 1940 Act. Under the 1940 Act, “Control Investments” are defined as investments in companies in which we own more than 25.0% of the voting securities or maintain greater than 50.0% of the board representation. Under the 1940 Act, “Affiliated Investments” are defined as those non-control investments in companies in which we own between 5.0% and 25.0% of the voting securities. Under the 1940 Act, “Non-affiliated Investments” are defined as investments that are neither Control Investments nor Affiliated Investments.
Investment Valuation
The Company accounts for its investments at fair value in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”). ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, establishes a fair value hierarchy based on the quality of inputs used to measure fair value and enhances disclosure requirements for fair value measurements. ASC 820 requires the Company to assume that its investments are to be sold at the statement of assets and liabilities date in the principal market to independent market participants, or in the absence of a principal market, in the most advantageous market, which may be a hypothetical market. Market participants are defined as buyers and sellers in the principal or most advantageous market that are independent, knowledgeable, and willing and able to transact.
Investments for which market quotations are readily available are fair valued at such market quotations obtained from independent third party pricing services and market makers subject to any decision by our board of directors to approve a fair value determination to reflect significant events affecting the value of these investments. We value investments for which market quotations are not readily available at fair value as approved, in good faith, by our board of directors based on input from our Manager, the audit committee of our board of directors and a third party independent valuation firm. Determinations of fair value may involve subjective judgments and estimates. The types of factors that may be considered in determining the fair value of our investments include the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s ability to make payments, market yield trend analysis, the markets in which the portfolio company does business, comparison to publicly traded companies, discounted cash flow and other relevant factors.
We undertake a multi-step valuation process each quarter when valuing investments for which market quotations are not readily available, as described below:
· Each investment is initially valued by the responsible investment professionals of our Manager and preliminary valuation conclusions are documented and discussed with the senior management of our Manager; and
· An independent valuation firm engaged by our board of directors reviews approximately one quarter of these preliminary valuations each quarter so that the valuation of each investment for which market quotes are not readily available is reviewed by the independent valuation firm at least annually.
In addition, all our investments are subject to the following valuation process:
· The audit committee of our board of directors reviews each preliminary valuation and our Manager and independent valuation firm (if applicable) will supplement the preliminary valuation to reflect any comments provided by the audit committee; and
· Our board of directors discusses the valuations and approves the fair value of each investment, in good faith, based on the input of our Manager, independent valuation firm (to the extent applicable) and the audit committee of our board of directors.
Our investment in GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007, Ltd. (“Saratoga CLO”) is carried at fair value, which is based on a discounted cash flow model that utilizes prepayment, re-investment and loss assumptions based on historical experience and projected performance, economic factors, the characteristics of the underlying cash flow, and comparable yields for equity interests in collateralized loan obligation funds similar to Saratoga CLO, when available, as determined by our Manager and recommended to our board of directors. Specifically, we use Intex cash flow models, or an appropriate substitute, to form the basis for the valuation of our investment in Saratoga CLO. The models use a set of assumptions including projected default rates, recovery rates, reinvestment rate and prepayment rates in order to arrive at estimated valuations. The assumptions are based on available market data and projections provided by third parties as well as management estimates. We use the output from the Intex models (i.e., the estimated cash flows) to perform a discounted cash flows analysis on expected future cash flows to determine a valuation for our investment in Saratoga CLO.
Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private investments and private companies, are inherently uncertain, they may fluctuate over short periods of time and may be based on estimates. The determination of fair value may differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these investments existed. Our net asset value could be materially affected if the determinations regarding the fair value of our investments were materially higher or lower than the values that we ultimately realize upon the disposal of such investments.
Derivative Financial Instruments
We account for derivative financial instruments in accordance with ASC Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging (“ASC 815”). ASC 815 requires recognizing all derivative instruments as either assets or liabilities on the consolidated statements of assets and liabilities at fair value. The Company values derivative contracts at the closing fair value provided by the counterparty. Changes in the values of derivative contracts are included in the consolidated statements of operations.
Investment Transactions and Income Recognition
Purchases and sales of investments and the related realized gains or losses are recorded on a trade-date basis. Interest income, adjusted for amortization of premium and accretion of discount, is recorded on an accrual basis to the extent that such amounts are expected to be collected. The Company stops accruing interest on its investments when it is determined that interest is no longer collectible. Discounts and premiums on investments purchased are accreted/amortized over the life of the respective investment using the effective yield method. The amortized cost of investments represents the original cost adjusted for the accretion of discounts and amortizations of premium on investments.
Loans are generally placed on non-accrual status when there is reasonable doubt that principal or interest will be collected. Accrued interest is generally reserved when a loan is placed on non-accrual status. Interest payments received on non-accrual loans may be recognized as a reduction in principal depending upon management’s judgment regarding collectability. Non-accrual loans are restored to accrual status when past due principal and interest is paid and, in management’s judgment, are likely to remain current, although we may make exceptions to this general rule if the loan has sufficient collateral value and is in the process of collection.
Interest income on our investment in Saratoga CLO is recorded using the effective interest method in accordance with the provisions of ASC Topic 325-40, Investments-Other, Beneficial Interests in Securitized Financial Assets, based on the anticipated yield and the estimated cash flows over the projected life of the investment. Yields are revised when there are changes in actual or estimated cash flows due to changes in prepayments and/or re-investments, credit losses or asset pricing. Changes in estimated yield are recognized as an adjustment to the estimated yield over the remaining life of the investment from the date the estimated yield was changed.
Paid-in-Kind Interest
The Company holds debt investments in its portfolio that contain a payment-in-kind (“PIK”) interest provision. The PIK interest, which represents contractually deferred interest added to the investment balance that is generally due at maturity, is generally recorded on the accrual basis to the extent such amounts are expected to be collected. We stop accruing PIK interest if we do not expect the issuer to be able to pay all principal and interest when due.
Deferred Credit Facility Financing Costs
Financing costs incurred in connection with our credit facility are deferred and amortized using the straight line method over the life of their respective facilities. Financing costs incurred in connection with our SBA debentures are deferred and amortized using the effective yield method over the life of the debentures.
Contingencies
In the ordinary course of its business, the Company may enter into contracts or agreements that contain indemnifications or warranties. Future events could occur that lead to the execution of these provisions against the Company. Based on its history and experience, management feels that the likelihood of such an event is remote.
In the ordinary course of business, the Company may directly or indirectly be a defendant or plaintiff in legal actions with respect to bankruptcy, insolvency or other types of proceedings. Such lawsuits may involve claims that could adversely affect the value of certain financial instruments owned by the Company.
Income Taxes
The Company has filed an election to be treated for tax purposes as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code and, among other things, intends to make the requisite distributions to its stockholders which will relieve the Company from federal income taxes. Therefore, no provision has been recorded for federal income taxes.
In order to qualify as a RIC, among other requirements, the Company is required to timely distribute to its stockholders at least 90.0% of its investment company taxable income, as defined by the Code, for each fiscal tax year. The Company will be subject to a nondeductible U.S. federal excise tax of 4.0% on undistributed income if it does not distribute at least 98.0% of its ordinary income in any calendar year and 98.2% of its capital gain net income for each one-year period ending on October 31.
Depending on the level of taxable income earned in a tax year, the Company may choose to carry forward taxable income in excess of current year dividend distributions into the next tax year and pay a 4.0% excise tax on such income, as required. To the extent that the Company determines that its estimated current year annual taxable income will be in excess of estimated current year dividend distributions for excise tax purposes, the Company accrues excise tax, if any, on estimated excess taxable income as taxable income is earned.
In accordance with certain applicable Treasury regulations and private letter rulings issued by the Internal Revenue Service, a RIC may treat a distribution of its own stock as fulfilling its RIC distribution requirements if each stockholder may elect to receive his or her entire distribution in either cash or stock of the RIC subject to a limitation on the aggregate amount of cash to be distributed to all stockholders, which limitation must be at least 20.0% of the aggregate declared distribution. If too many stockholders elect to receive cash, each stockholder electing to receive cash will receive a pro rata amount of cash (with the balance of the distribution paid in stock). In no event will any stockholder, electing to receive cash, receive less than 20.0% of his or her entire distribution in cash. If these and certain other requirements are met, for U.S federal income tax purposes, the amount of the dividend paid in stock will be equal to the amount of cash that could have been received instead of stock.
ASC 740, Income Taxes, provides guidance for how uncertain tax positions should be recognized, measured, presented and disclosed in the financial statements. ASC 740 requires the evaluation of tax positions taken or expected to be taken in the course of preparing the Company’s tax returns to determine whether the tax positions are “more-likely-than-not” of being sustained by the applicable tax authority. Tax positions deemed to meet a “more-likely-than-not” threshold would be recorded as a tax benefit or expense in the current period. The Company recognizes interest and penalties, if any, related to unrecognized tax benefits as income tax expense in the consolidated statements of operations. During the fiscal year ended February 28, 2013, the Company did not incur any interest or penalties. Although we file federal and state tax returns, our major tax jurisdiction is federal. The 2010, 2011 and 2012 federal tax years for the Company remain subject to examination by the IRS.
Dividends
Dividends to common stockholders are recorded on the ex-dividend date. The amount to be paid out as a dividend is determined by the board of directors. Net realized capital gains, if any, are generally distributed at least annually, although we may decide to retain such capital gains for reinvestment.
We have adopted a dividend reinvestment plan that provides for reinvestment of our dividend distributions on behalf of our stockholders unless a stockholder elects to receive cash. As a result, if our board of directors authorizes, and we declare, a cash dividend, then our stockholders who have not “opted out” of our dividend reinvestment plan will have their cash dividends automatically reinvested in additional shares of our common stock, rather than receiving the cash dividends. If our common stock is trading below net asset value at the time of valuation, the plan administrator may receive the dividend or distribution in cash and purchase common stock in the open market, on the New York Stock Exchange or elsewhere, for the account of each participant in our dividend reinvestment plan.
Capital Gains Incentive Fee
The Company records an expense accrual on the consolidated statements of operations, relating to the capital gains incentive fee payable on the consolidated statements of assets and liabilities, by the Company to its investment adviser when the unrealized gains on its investments exceed all realized capital losses on its investments given the fact that a capital gains incentive fee would be owed to the investment adviser if the Company were to liquidate its investment portfolio at such time. The actual incentive fee payable to the Company’s investment adviser related to capital gains will be determined and payable in arrears at the end of each fiscal year and will include only realized capital gains for the period.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities, which requires entities to disclose information about offsetting and related arrangements to enable users of its financial statements to understand the effect of those arrangements on its financial position. The guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013 with retrospective application for all comparative periods presented. The adoption of this guidance, which is related to disclosure only, is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Risk Management
In the ordinary course of its business, the Company manages a variety of risks, including market risk and credit risk. Market risk is the risk of potential adverse changes to the value of investments because of changes in market conditions such as interest rate movements and volatility in investment prices.
Credit risk is the risk of default or non-performance by portfolio companies, equivalent to the investment’s carrying amount.
The Company is also exposed to credit risk related to maintaining all of its cash and cash equivalents, including those in reserve accounts, at a major financial institution and credit risk related to any of its derivative counterparties.
The Company has investments in lower rated and comparable quality unrated high yield bonds and bank loans. Investments in high yield investments are accompanied by a greater degree of credit risk. The risk of loss due to default by the issuer is significantly greater for holders of high yield securities, because such investments are generally unsecured and are often subordinated to other creditors of the issuer.
Note 3. Investments
As noted above, the Company values all investments in accordance with ASC 820. ASC 820 requires enhanced disclosures about assets and liabilities that are measured and reported at fair value. As defined in ASC 820, fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.
ASC 820 establishes a hierarchal disclosure framework which prioritizes and ranks the level of market price observability of inputs used in measuring investments at fair value. Market price observability is affected by a number of factors, including the type of investment and the characteristics specific to the investment. Investments with readily available active quoted prices or for which fair value can be measured from actively quoted prices generally will have a higher degree of market price observability and a lesser degree of judgment used in measuring fair value.
Based on the observability of the inputs used in the valuation techniques, the Company is required to provide disclosures on fair value measurements according to the fair value hierarchy. The fair value hierarchy ranks the observability of the inputs used to determine fair values. Investments carried at fair value are classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:
· Level 1-Valuations based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access.
· Level 2-Valuations based on inputs other than quoted prices in active markets, which are either directly or indirectly observable.
· Level 3-Valuations based on inputs that are unobservable and significant to the overall fair value measurement. The inputs used in the determination of fair value may require significant management judgment or estimation. Such information may be the result of consensus pricing information or broker quotes which include a disclaimer that the broker would not be held to such a price in an actual transaction. The non-binding nature of consensus pricing and/or quotes accompanied by disclaimer would result in classification as Level 3 asset, assuming no additional corroborating evidence.
In addition to using the above inputs in investment valuations, the Company continues to employ the valuation policy approved by the board of directors that is consistent with ASC 820 and the 1940 Act (see Note 2). Consistent with our Company’s valuation policy, we evaluate the source of inputs, including any markets in which our investments are trading, in determining fair value.
The following table presents fair value measurements of investments, by major class, as of February 28, 2013 (dollars in thousands), according to the fair value hierarchy:
The following table presents fair value measurements of investments, by major class, as of February 29, 2012 (dollars in thousands), according to the fair value hierarchy:
The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances for investments that use Level 3 inputs for the year ended February 28, 2013 (dollars in thousands):
Purchases and other adjustments to cost include purchases of new investments at cost, effects of refinancing/restructuring, accretion/amortization of income from discount/premium on debt securities, and PIK.
Sales and redemptions represent net proceeds received from investments sold, and principal paydowns received, during the period.
The net change in unrealized gain/loss on investments held as of February 28, 2013 is $7,143,012 and is included in net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations.
The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances for investments that use Level 3 inputs for the year ended February 29, 2012 (dollars in thousands):
Purchases and other adjustments to cost include purchases of new investments at cost, effects of refinancing/restructuring, accretion/amortization of income from discount/premium on debt securities, and PIK.
Sales and redemptions represent net proceeds received from investments sold, and principal paydowns received, during the period.
The net change in unrealized gain/loss on investments held as of February 29, 2012 is $4,057,635 and is included in net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments in the consolidated statements of operations.
The valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs used in recurring Level 3 fair value measurements of assets as of February 28, 2013 were as follows (dollars in thousands):
For investments utilizing a market comparables valuation technique, a significant increase (decrease) in the market yield, in isolation, would result in a significantly lower (higher) fair value measurement, and a significant increase (decrease) in any of the EBITDA valuation multiples, in isolation, would result in a significantly higher (lower) fair value measurement. For investments utilizing a discounted cash flow valuation technique, a significant increase (decrease) in the discount rate, in isolation, would result in a significantly lower (higher) fair value measurement.
The composition of our investments as of February 28, 2013, at amortized cost and fair value were as follows (dollars in thousands):
The composition of our investments as of February 29, 2012, at amortized cost and fair value were as follows (dollars in thousands):
For loans and debt securities for which market quotations are not available, we determine their fair value based on third party indicative broker quotes, where available, or the assumptions that a hypothetical market participant would use to value the security in a current hypothetical sale using a market yield valuation methodology. In applying the market yield valuation methodology, we determine the fair value based on such factors as market participant assumptions including synthetic credit ratings, estimated remaining life, current market yield and interest rate spreads of similar securities as of the measurement date. If, in our judgment, the market yield methodology is not sufficient or appropriate, we may use additional methodologies such as an asset liquidation or expected recovery model.
For equity securities of portfolio companies and partnership interests, we determine the fair value based on the market approach with value then attributed to equity or equity like securities using the enterprise value waterfall valuation methodology. Under the enterprise value waterfall valuation methodology, we determine the enterprise fair value of the portfolio company and then waterfall the enterprise value over the portfolio company’s securities in order of their preference relative to one another. To estimate the enterprise value of the portfolio company, we weigh some or all of the traditional market valuation methods and factors based on the individual circumstances of the portfolio company in order to estimate the enterprise value. The methodologies for performing investments may be based on, among other things: valuations of comparable public companies, recent sales of private and public comparable companies, discounting the forecasted cash flows of the portfolio company, third party valuations of the portfolio company, considering offers from third parties to buy the company, estimating the value to potential strategic buyers and considering the value of recent investments in the equity securities of the portfolio company. For non-performing investments, we may estimate the liquidation or collateral value of the portfolio company’s assets and liabilities. We also take into account historical and anticipated financial results.
Our investment in GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007, Ltd. (“Saratoga CLO”) is carried at fair value, which is based on a discounted cash flow model that utilizes prepayment, re-investment and loss assumptions based on historical experience and projected performance, economic factors, the characteristics of the underlying cash flow, and comparable yields for equity interests in collateralized loan obligation funds similar to Saratoga CLO, when available, as determined by our Manager and recommended to our board of directors. Specifically, we use Intex cash flow models, or an appropriate substitute, to form the basis for the valuation of our investment in Saratoga CLO. The models use a set of assumptions including projected default rates, recovery rates, reinvestment rate and prepayment rates in order to arrive at estimated valuations. The reinvestment period for the Saratoga CLO ended on January 20, 2013, and, as a result, reinvestment assumptions are no longer applicable. The assumptions are based on available market data and projections provided by third parties as well as management estimates. We use the output from the Intex models (i.e., the estimated cash flows) to perform a discounted cash flows analysis on expected future cash flows to determine a valuation for our investment in Saratoga CLO at February 28, 2013. The significant inputs for the valuation model include:
· Default rates: 3.0%
· Recovery rates: 35-70%
· Prepayment rate: 20.0%
Note 4. Investment in GSC Investment Corp. CLO 2007, Ltd. (“Saratoga CLO”)
On January 22, 2008, we invested $30 million in all of the outstanding subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO (which are referred in the statements of assets and liabilities of Saratoga CLO below as “Preference shares”), a collateralized loan obligation fund managed by us that invests primarily in senior secured loans. Additionally, we entered into a collateral management agreement with Saratoga CLO pursuant to which we act as collateral manager to it. In return for our collateral management services, we are entitled to a senior collateral management fee of 0.10% and a subordinate collateral management fee of 0.40% of the outstanding principal amount of Saratoga CLO’s assets, to be paid quarterly to the extent of available proceeds. We are also entitled to an incentive management fee equal to 20.0% of excess cash flow to the extent the Saratoga CLO subordinated notes receive an internal rate of return equal to or greater than 12.0%. For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, we accrued $2.0 million, $2.0 million, and $2.0 million in management fee income, respectively and $4.2 million, $4.2 million, and $3.3 million in interest income, respectively, from Saratoga CLO. We did not accrue any amounts related to the incentive management fee as the 12.0% hurdle rate has not yet been achieved.
At February 28, 2013, the Company determined that the fair value of its investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO was $25.5 million, whereas the net asset value of Saratoga CLO on such date was $30.8 million. The Company does not believe that the net asset value of Saratoga CLO, which is the difference between Saratoga CLO’s assets and liabilities at a given point in time, necessarily equates to the fair value of its investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO. Specifically, the Company determines the fair value of its investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO based on the present value of the projected future cash flows of the subordinated notes over the life of Saratoga CLO. At February 28, 2013, Saratoga CLO had investments with a principal balance of $383.3 million and a weighted average spread over LIBOR of 4.3%, and had debt with a principal balance of $366.0 million with a weighted average spread over LIBOR of 1.4%. As a result, Saratoga CLO earns a “spread” between the interest income it receives on its investments and the interest expense it pays on its debt and other operating expenses, which is distributed quarterly to the Company as the
holder of its subordinated notes. At February 28, 2013, the total “spread”, or projected future cash flows of the subordinated notes, over the life of Saratoga CLO was $38.7 million, which had a present value of approximately $26.0 million, using a 13.0% discount rate. At February 28, 2013, the fair value of the subordinated notes, which we base upon the present value of the projected cash flows, was $25.5 million, which was less than the net asset value of Saratoga CLO on such date by approximately $5.3 million.
At February 29, 2012, the Company determined that the fair value of its investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO was $25.8 million, whereas the net asset value of Saratoga CLO on such date was $24.0 million. The Company does not believe that the net asset value of Saratoga CLO, which is the difference between Saratoga CLO’s assets and liabilities at a given point in time, necessarily equates to the fair value of its investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO. Specifically, the Company determines the fair value of its investment in the subordinated notes of Saratoga CLO based on the present value of the projected future cash flows of the subordinated notes over the life of Saratoga CLO. At February 29, 2012, Saratoga CLO had investments with a principal balance of $380.2 million and a weighted average spread over LIBOR of 3.6%, and had debt of $366.0 million with a weighted average spread over LIBOR of 1.4%. As a result, Saratoga CLO earns a “spread” between the interest income it receives on its investments and the interest expense it pays on its debt and other operating expenses, which is distributed quarterly to the Company as the holder of its subordinated notes. At February 29, 2012, the total “spread”, or projected future cash flows of the subordinated notes, over the life of Saratoga CLO was $47.1 million, which had a present value of approximately $26.3 million, using a 16.0% discount rate. At February 29, 2012, the fair value of the subordinated notes, which we base upon the present value of the projected cash flows, was $25.8 million, which was greater than the net asset value of Saratoga CLO on such date by approximately $1.8 million.
Note 5. Income Taxes
The Company intends to operate so as to qualify to be taxed as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code and, as such, will not be subject to federal income tax on the portion of taxable income and gains distributed to stockholders.
The Company owns 100.0% of Saratoga CLO, an exempted company incorporated in the Cayman Islands. For financial reporting purposes, the Saratoga CLO is not included as part of the consolidated financial statements. For federal income tax purposes, the Company has requested and received approval from the Internal Revenue Service to treat the Saratoga CLO as a disregarded entity. As such, for federal income tax purposes and for purposes of meeting the RIC qualification and diversification tests, the results of operations of the Saratoga CLO are included with those of the Company.
To qualify as a RIC, the Company is required to meet certain income and asset diversification tests in addition to distributing at least 90.0% of its investment company taxable income, as defined by the Code. Because federal income tax regulations differ from GAAP, distributions in accordance with tax regulations may differ from net investment income and realized gains recognized for financial reporting purposes. Differences may be permanent or temporary in nature. Permanent differences are reclassified among capital accounts in the financial statements to reflect their tax character. Differences in classification may also result from the treatment of short-term gains as ordinary income for tax purposes. As of February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, the Company reclassified for book purposes amounts arising from permanent book/tax differences primarily related to nondeductible excise tax, meals & entertainment, market discount, interest income with respect to the Saratoga CLO which is consolidated for tax purposes, and the tax character of distributions as follows (dollars in thousands):
For income tax purposes, distributions paid to shareholders are reported as ordinary income, return of capital, long term capital gains or a combination thereof. The tax character of distributions paid for the years ended February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012 was as follows (dollars in thousands):
For federal income tax purposes, as of February 28, 2013, the aggregate net unrealized depreciation for all securities is $2.7 million. The aggregate cost of securities for federal income tax purposes is $506.7 million.
For federal income tax purposes, as of February 29, 2012, the aggregate net unrealized depreciation for all securities is $8.3 million. The aggregate cost of securities for federal income tax purposes is $459.1 million.
At February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, the components of accumulated losses on a tax basis as detailed below differ from the amounts reflected per the Company’s consolidated statements of assets and liabilities by temporary book/tax differences primarily arising from the consolidation of the Saratoga CLO for tax purposes, market discount and original issue discount income, interest income accrual on defaulted bonds, write-off of investments, and amortization of organizational expenditures (dollars in thousands).
The Company has incurred capital losses of $19.3, $14.1 and $3.2 million for the years ended February 28, 2011, 2010 and 2009. Such capital losses will be available to offset future capital gains if any and if unused, will expire on February 28, 2019, 2018 and 2017.
At February 28, 2013, the Company had a short term capital loss of $10.4 million and a long-term capital loss of $11.2 million available to offset future capital gains. Post RIC-modernization act losses are deemed to arise on the first day of the fund’s following fiscal year and there is no expiration for these losses.
Management has analyzed the Company’s tax positions taken on federal income tax returns for all open years (fiscal years 2009-2013), and has concluded that no provision for uncertain income tax positions is required in the Company’s financial statements.
On December 22, 2010, the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010 (the “Modernization Act”) was enacted, and the provisions with the Modernization Act are effective for the Company for the year ended February 29, 2012. The Modernization Act is the first major piece of legislation affecting RICs since 1986 and it modernizes several of the federal income and excise tax provisions related to RICs. Some highlights of the enacted provisions are as follows:
New capital losses may now be carried forward indefinitely, and retain the character of the original loss. Under pre-enactment law, capital losses could be carried forward for eight years, and carried forward as short-term capital, irrespective of the character of the original loss.
The Modernization Act contains simplification provisions, which are aimed at preventing disqualification of a RIC for “inadvertent” failures of the asset diversification and/or qualifying income tests. Additionally, the Modernization Act exempts RICs from the preferential dividend rule, and repealed the 60-day designation requirement for certain types of pay-through income and gains.
Finally, the Modernization Act contains several provisions aimed at preserving the character of distributions made by a fiscal year RIC during the portion of its taxable year ending after October 31 or December 31, reducing the circumstances under which a RIC might be required to file amended Forms 1099 to restate previously reported distributions.
Note 6. Agreements
On July 30, 2010, the Company entered into an investment advisory and management agreement (the “Management Agreement”) with our Manager. The initial term of the Management Agreement is two years, with automatic, one-year renewals at the end of each year subject to certain approvals by our board of directors and/or our stockholders. On July 9, 2012, our board of directors approved the renewal of the Management Agreement for an additional one-year term. Pursuant to the Management Agreement, our Manager implements our business strategy on a day-to-day basis and performs certain services for us, subject to oversight by our board of directors. Our Manager is responsible for, among other duties, determining investment criteria, sourcing, analyzing and executing investments transactions, asset sales, financings and performing asset management duties. Under the Management Agreement, we have agreed to pay our Manager a management fee for investment advisory and management services consisting of a base management fee and an incentive fee.
The base management fee of 1.75% is calculated based on the average value of our gross assets (other than cash or cash equivalents, but including assets purchased with borrowed funds) at the end of the two most recently completed fiscal quarters, and appropriately adjusted for any share issuances or repurchases during the applicable fiscal quarter.
The incentive fee consists of the following two parts:
The first, payable quarterly in arrears, equals 20.0% of our pre-incentive fee net investment income, expressed as a rate of return on the value of our net assets at the end of the immediately preceding quarter, that exceeds a 1.875% quarterly (7.5% annualized) hurdle rate measured as of the end of each fiscal quarter, subject to a “catch-up” provision. Under this provision, in any fiscal quarter, our Manager receives no incentive fee unless our pre-incentive fee net investment income exceeds the hurdle rate of 1.875%. Our Manager will receive 100.0% of pre-incentive fee net investment income, if any, that exceeds the hurdle rate but is less than or equal to 2.344% in any fiscal quarter (9.376% annualized); and 20.0% of the amount of the our pre-incentive fee net
investment income, if any, that exceeds 2.344% in any fiscal quarter (9.376% annualized).
The second part of the incentive fee is determined and payable in arrears as of the end of each fiscal year (or upon termination of the Management Agreement) and equals 20.0% of our “incentive fee capital gains,” which equals our realized capital gains on a cumulative basis from May 31, 2010 through the end of the year, if any, computed net of all realized capital losses and unrealized capital depreciation on a cumulative basis, less the aggregate amount of any previously paid capital gain incentive fee. Importantly, the capital gains portion of the incentive fee is based on realized gains and realized and unrealized losses from May 31, 2010. Therefore, realized and unrealized losses incurred prior to such time will not be taken into account when calculating the capital gains portion of the incentive fee, and our Manager will be entitled to 20.0% of incentive fee capital gains that arise after May 31, 2010. In addition, for the purpose of the “incentive fee capital gains” calculations, the cost basis for computing realized gains and losses on investments held by us as of May 31, 2010 will equal the fair value of such investments as of such date.
For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, we incurred $2.1 million, $1.6 million, and $1.6 million in base management fees, respectively. For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, we incurred $1.0 million, $0.5 million, and $0.4 million in incentive fees related to pre-incentive fee net investment income. For the year ended February 28, 2011, we incurred $0.4 million in incentive fees related to pre-incentive fee net investment income and recorded a $2.6 million reversal in previously recorded deferred incentive management fees related to net investment income as a result of the agreement of our former investment adviser, GSCP (NJ), L.P., to waive such amount in connection with the recapitalization transaction described in “Note 13. Recapitalization Transaction” below. For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, we accrued $1.0 million, $0.7 million, and $1.5 million in incentive management fees related to capital gains, respectively. The accrual is calculated using both realized and unrealized capital gains for the period. The actual incentive fee related to capital gains will be determined and payable in arrears at the end of the fiscal year and will include only realized capital gains for the period. As of February 28, 2013, $0.6 million of base management fees and $3.9 million of incentive fees were accrued and included in management and incentive fees payable in the accompanying consolidated statements of assets and liabilities. As of February 29, 2012, $0.4 million of base management fees and $2.5 million of incentive fees were accrued and included in management and incentive fees payable in the accompanying consolidated statements of assets and liabilities.
On July 30, 2010, the Company entered into a separate administration agreement (the “Administration Agreement”) with our Manager, pursuant to which our Manager, as our administrator, has agreed to furnish us with the facilities and administrative services necessary to conduct our day-to-day operations and provide managerial assistance on our behalf to those portfolio companies to which we are required to provide such assistance. The initial term of the Administration Agreement is two years, with automatic, one-year renewals at the end of each year subject to certain approvals by our board of directors and/or our stockholders. The amount of expenses payable or reimbursable thereunder by the Company is capped at $1.0 million for the initial two year term of the administration agreement. On July 9, 2012, our board of directors approved the renewal of the Administration Agreement for an additional one-year term and determined to maintain the cap on the payment or reimbursement of expenses by the Company thereunder to $1.0 million for the additional one-year term.
For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, and February 28, 2011, we recognized $1.0 million, $1.0 million and $0.8 million in administrator expenses for the periods, pertaining to bookkeeping, record keeping and other administrative services provided to us in addition to our allocable portion of rent and other overhead related expenses. As of February 28, 2013, $0.2 million of administrator expenses were accrued and included in due to manager in the accompanying consolidated statements of assets and liabilities. As of February 29, 2012, $0.4 million of administrator expenses were accrued and included in due to manager in the accompanying consolidated statements of assets and liabilities.
Note 7. Borrowings
Credit Facility
As a BDC, we are only allowed to employ leverage to the extent that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 200.0% after giving effect to such leverage. The amount of leverage that we employ at any time depends on our assessment of the market and other factors at the time of any proposed borrowing.
On April 11, 2007, we entered into a $100.0 million revolving securitized credit facility (the “Revolving Facility”). On May 1, 2007, we entered into a $25.7 million term securitized credit facility (the “Term Facility” and, together with the Revolving Facility, the “Facilities”), which was fully drawn at closing. In December 2007, we consolidated the Facilities by using a draw under the Revolving Facility to repay the Term Facility. In response to the market wide decline in financial asset prices, which negatively
affected the value of our portfolio, we terminated the revolving period of the Revolving Facility effective January 14, 2009 and commenced a two-year amortization period during which all principal proceeds from the collateral was used to repay outstanding borrowings. A significant percentage of our total assets had been pledged under the Revolving Facility to secure our obligations thereunder. Under the Revolving Facility, funds were borrowed from or through certain lenders and interest was payable monthly at the greater of the commercial paper rate and our lender’s prime rate plus 4.00% plus a default rate of 2.00% or, if the commercial paper market was unavailable, the greater of the prevailing LIBOR rates and our lender’s prime rate plus 6.00% plus a default rate of 3.00%.
In March 2009, we amended the Revolving Facility to increase the portion of the portfolio that could be invested in “CCC” rated investments in return for an increased interest rate and expedited amortization. As a result of these transactions, we expected to have additional cushion under our borrowing base under the Revolving Facility that would allow us to better manage our capital in times of declining asset prices and market dislocation.
On July 30, 2009, we exceeded the permissible borrowing limit under the Revolving Facility for 30 consecutive days, resulting in an event of default under the Revolving Facility. As a result of this event of default, our lender had the right to accelerate repayment of the outstanding indebtedness under the Revolving Facility and to foreclose and liquidate the collateral pledged thereunder. Acceleration of the outstanding indebtedness and/or liquidation of the collateral could have had a material adverse effect on our liquidity, financial condition and operations.
On July 30, 2010, we used the net proceeds from (i) the stock purchase transaction and (ii) a portion of the funds available to us under the $45.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility (the “Replacement Facility”) with Madison Capital Funding LLC, in each case, described in “Note 13. Recapitalization Transaction” below, to pay the full amount of principal and accrued interest, including default interest, outstanding under the Revolving Facility. As a result, the Revolving Facility was terminated in connection therewith. Substantially all of our total assets have been pledged under the Replacement Facility to secure our obligations thereunder.
On February 24, 2012, we amended our senior secured revolving credit facility with Madison Capital Funding LLC to, among other things:
· expand the borrowing capacity under the credit facility from $40.0 million to $45.0 million;
· extend the period during which we may make and repay borrowings under the credit facility from July 30, 2013 to February 24, 2015 (the “Revolving Period”). The Revolving Period may upon the occurrence of an event of default, by action of the lenders or automatically. All borrowings and other amounts payable under the credit facility are due and payable five years after the end of the Revolving Period; and
· remove the condition that we may not acquire additional loan assets without the prior written consent of Madison Capital Funding LLC.
As of February 28, 2013, there was $24.3 million outstanding under the Replacement Facility and the Company is in compliance with all of the limitations and requirements of the Replacement Facility. The carrying amount of the amount outstanding of the Replacement Facility approximates its fair value. $2.3 million of financing costs related to the Replacement Facility have been capitalized and are being amortized over the term of the facility. For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2011, we recorded $2.0 million, $0.6 million, and $2.2 million of interest expense, respectively. For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2011, we recorded $0.4 million, $0.7 million and $0.4 million of amortization of deferred financing costs related to the Replacement Facility and Revolving Facility, respectively. The interest rates during the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2011 on the outstanding borrowings under the Replacement Facility ranged from 7.50% to 7.50%, 0.75% to 7.50%, and 7.50% to 9.25% respectively.
The Replacement Facility contains limitations as to how borrowed funds may be used, such as restrictions on industry concentrations, asset size, weighted average life, currency denomination and collateral interests. The Replacement Facility also includes certain requirements relating to portfolio performance, the violation of which could result in the limit of further advances and, in some cases, result in an event of default, allowing the lenders to accelerate repayment of amounts owed thereunder. The Replacement Facility has an eight year term, consisting of a three year period (the “Revolving Period”), under which the Company may make and repay borrowings, and a final maturity five years from the end of the Revolving Period. Availability on the Replacement Facility will be subject to a borrowing base calculation, based on, among other things, applicable advance rates (which vary from 50.0% to 75.0% of par or fair value depending on the type of loan asset) and the value of certain “eligible” loan assets included as part of the Borrowing Base. Funds may be borrowed at the greater of the prevailing LIBOR rate and 2.00%, plus an applicable margin of 5.50%. At the Company’s option, funds may be borrowed based on an alternative base rate, which in no event
will be less than 3.00%, and the applicable margin over such alternative base rate is 4.50%. In addition, the Company will pay the lenders a commitment fee of 0.75% per year on the unused amount of the Replacement Facility for the duration of the Revolving Period.
Our borrowing base under the Replacement Facility was $35.7 million at February 28, 2013. For purposes of determining the borrowing base, most assets are assigned the values set forth in our most recent quarterly report on Form 10-Q filed with the SEC. Accordingly, the February 28, 2013 borrowing base relies upon the valuations set forth in the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended November 30, 2012. The valuations presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K will not be incorporated into the borrowing base until after this Annual Report on Form 10-K is filed with the SEC.
SBA Debentures
SBIC LP is able to borrow funds from the SBA against regulatory capital (which approximates equity capital) that is paid in and is subject to customary regulatory requirements including but not limited to an examination by the SBA. As of February 28, 2013, we have funded SBIC LP with $25.0 million of equity capital, and have $36.0 million of SBA-guaranteed debentures outstanding. SBA debentures are non-recourse to us, have a 10-year maturity, and may be prepaid at any time without penalty. The interest rate of SBA debentures is fixed at the time of issuance, often referred to as pooling, at a market-driven spread over 10-year U.S. Treasury Notes. SBA current regulations limit the amount that SBIC LP may borrow to a maximum of $150.0 million, which is up to twice its potential regulatory capital.
SBICs are designed to stimulate the flow of private equity capital to eligible small businesses. Under SBA regulations, SBICs may make loans to eligible small businesses and invest in the equity securities of small businesses. Under present SBA regulations, eligible small businesses include businesses that have a tangible net worth not exceeding $18.0 million and have average annual fully taxed net income not exceeding $6.0 million for the two most recent fiscal years. In addition, an SBIC must devote 25.0% of its investment activity to ‘‘smaller’’ concerns as defined by the SBA. A smaller concern is one that has a tangible net worth not exceeding $6.0 million and has average annual fully taxed net income not exceeding $2.0 million for the two most recent fiscal years. SBA regulations also provide alternative size standard criteria to determine eligibility, which depend on the industry in which the business is engaged and are based on such factors as the number of employees and gross sales. According to SBA regulations, SBICs may make long-term loans to small businesses, invest in the equity securities of such businesses and provide them with consulting and advisory services.
SBIC LP is subject to regulation and oversight by the SBA, including requirements with respect to maintaining certain minimum financial ratios and other covenants. Receipt of an SBIC license does not assure that SBIC LP will receive SBA guaranteed debenture funding, which is dependent upon SBIC LP continuing to be in compliance with SBA regulations and policies. The SBA, as a creditor, will have a superior claim to SBIC LP’s assets over our stockholders in the event we liquidate SBIC LP or the SBA exercises its remedies under the SBA-guaranteed debentures issued by SBIC LP upon an event of default.
The Company received exemptive relief from the Securities and Exchange Commission to permit it to exclude the debt of SBIC LP guaranteed by the SBA from the definition of senior securities in the 200.0% asset coverage test under the 1940 Act. This allows the Company increased flexibility under the 200.0% asset coverage test by permitting it to borrow up to $150.0 million more than it would otherwise be able to absent the receipt of this exemptive relief.
As of February 28, 2013 there was $36.0 million outstanding of SBA debentures. The carrying amount of the amount outstanding of SBA debentures approximates its fair value. $1.4 million of financing costs related to the SBA debentures have been capitalized and are being amortized over the term of the commitment and drawdown. For the year ended February 28, 2013, we recorded $0.1 million of interest expense related to the SBA debentures. For the year ended February 28, 2013, we recorded $0.1 million of amortization of deferred financing costs related to the SBA debentures. The weighted average interest rate during the year ended February 28, 2013 on the outstanding borrowings of the SBA debentures was 1.42%. There were no outstanding SBA debentures at February 29, 2012.
Note 8. Directors Fees
The independent directors receive an annual fee of $40,000. They also receive $2,500 plus reimbursement of reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with attending each board meeting and receive $1,000 plus reimbursement of reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with attending each committee meeting. In addition, the chairman of the Audit Committee receives an annual fee of $5,000 and the chairman of each other committee receives an annual fee of $2,000 for their additional services in these capacities. In addition, we have purchased directors’ and officers’ liability insurance on behalf of our directors and officers. Independent directors have the option to receive their directors’ fees in the form of our common stock issued at
a price per share equal to the greater of net asset value or the market price at the time of payment. No compensation is paid to directors who are “interested persons” of the Company (as such term is defined in the 1940 Act). For the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2011, we accrued $0.2 million, $0.2 million, and $0.4 million for directors’ fees expense, respectively. As of February 28, 2013 and February 29, 2012, $0.05 million and $0.05 million in directors’ fees expense were unpaid and included in accounts payable and accrued expenses in the consolidated statements of assets and liabilities. As of February 28, 2013, we had not issued any common stock to our directors as compensation for their services.
Note 9. Stockholders’ Equity
On May 16, 2006, GSC Group, Inc. capitalized the LLC, by contributing $1,000 in exchange for 67 shares, constituting all of the issued and outstanding shares of the LLC.
On March 20, 2007, the Company issued 95,995.5 and 8,136.2 shares of common stock, priced at $150.00 per share, to GSC Group and certain individual employees of GSC Group, respectively, in exchange for the general partnership interest and a limited partnership interest in GSC Partners CDO III GP, LP, collectively valued at $15.6 million. At this time, the 6.7 shares owned by GSC Group in the LLC were exchanged for 6.7 shares of the Company.
On March 28, 2007, the Company completed its IPO of 725,000 shares of common stock, priced at $150.00 per share, before underwriting discounts and commissions. Total proceeds received from the IPO, net of $7.1 million in underwriter’s discount and commissions, and $1.0 million in offering costs, were $100.7 million.
On November 13, 2009, we declared a dividend of $18.25 per share payable on December 31, 2009. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to $2.1 million or $2.50 per share. Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of $2.1 million in cash and 864,872.5 of newly issued shares of common stock.
On July 30, 2010, our Manager and its affiliates purchased 986,842 shares of common stock at $15.20 per share. Total proceeds received from this sale were $15.0 million. See “Note 13. Recapitalization Transaction.”
On August 12, 2010, we effected a one-for-ten reverse stock split of our outstanding common stock. As a result of the reverse stock split, every ten shares of our common stock were converted into one share of our common stock. Any fractional shares received as a result of the reverse stock split were redeemed for cash. The total cash payment in lieu of shares was $230. Immediately after the reverse stock split, we had 2,680,842 shares of our common stock outstanding.
On November 12, 2010, we declared a dividend of $4.40 per share payable on December 29, 2010. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to approximately $1.2 million or $0.44 per share. Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of approximately $1.2 million in cash and 596,235 shares of common stock.
On November 15, 2011, we declared a dividend of $3.00 per share payable on December 30, 2011. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to approximately $2.0 million or $0.60 per share. Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of approximately $2.0 million in cash and 599,584 shares of common stock.
On November 9, 2012, the Company declared a dividend of $4.25 per share payable on December 31, 2012. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to approximately $3.3 million or $0.85 per share. Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of approximately $3.3 million in cash and 853,455 shares of common stock.
Note 10. Earnings Per Share
In accordance with the provisions of FASB ASC 260, “Earnings per Share” (“ASC 260”), basic earnings per share is computed by dividing earnings available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period. Other potentially dilutive common shares, and the related impact to earnings, are considered when calculating earnings per
share on a diluted basis.
The following information sets forth the computation of the weighted average basic and diluted net decrease in net assets per share from operations for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2011 (dollars in thousands except share and per share amounts):
Note 11. Dividend
On November 9, 2012, the Company declared a dividend of $4.25 per share payable on December 31, 2012. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to approximately $3.3 million or $0.85 per share.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of approximately $3.3 million in cash and 853,455 shares of common stock, or 22.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 20.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $15.444 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 14, 17, 19, 2012. The consolidated financial statements for the period ended November 30, 2012 have been retroactively adjusted to reflect the increase in common stock as a result of the dividend in accordance with the provisions of ASC 505-20-S50 regarding disclosure of a capital structure change after the interim balance sheet but before the release of the financial statements.
On November 15, 2011, we declared a dividend of $3.00 per share payable on December 30, 2011. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to approximately $2.0 million or $0.60 per share.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of approximately $2.0 million in cash and 599,584 shares of common stock, or 18.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 20.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $13.1171 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 20, 21 and 22, 2011. The financial statements for the period ended November 30, 2011 have been retroactively adjusted to reflect the increase in common stock as a result of the dividend in accordance with the provisions of ASC 505-20-S50 regarding disclosure of a capital structure change after the interim balance sheet but before the release of the financial statements.
On November 12, 2010, we declared a dividend of $4.40 per share payable on December 23, 2010. Shareholders had the option to receive payment of the dividend in cash, shares of common stock, or a combination of cash and shares of common stock, provided that the aggregate cash payable to all shareholders was limited to approximately $1.2 million or $0.44 per share.
Based on shareholder elections, the dividend consisted of approximately $1.2 million in cash and 596,235 shares of common stock, or 22.0% of our outstanding common stock prior to the dividend payment. The amount of cash elected to be received was greater than the cash limit of 10.0% of the aggregate dividend amount, thus resulting in the payment of a combination of cash and stock to shareholders who elected to receive cash. The number of shares of common stock comprising the stock portion was calculated based on a price of $17.8049 per share, which equaled the volume weighted average trading price per share of the common stock on December 20, 21 and 22, 2010. The financial statements for the period ended November 30, 2010 have been retroactively adjusted to reflect the increase in common stock as a result of the dividend in accordance with the provisions of ASC 505-20-S50 regarding disclosure of a capital structure change after the interim balance sheet but before the release of the financial statements.
The following tables summarize dividends declared during the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2011 (dollars in thousands except per share amounts):
* Amount per share is calculated based on the number of shares outstanding at the date of declaration.
Note 12. Financial Highlights
The following is a schedule of financial highlights for the years ended February 28, 2013, February 29, 2012, February 28, 2011, 2010, and 2009:
For 2010 and 2009 the amount per share has been adjusted to reflect a one-for-ten reverse stock split effectuated in August 2010.
(1) Net investment income per share is calculated using the weighted average shares outstanding during the period. Net investment income excluding expense waiver and reimbursement equals $2.05, $4.75 and $15.46 per share for the years ended February 28, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
(2) Total investment return is calculated assuming a purchase of common shares at the current market value on the first day and a sale at the current market value on the last day of the periods reported. Dividends and distributions, if any, are assumed for purposes of this calculation to be reinvested at prices obtained under the Company’s dividend reinvestment plan. Total investment return does not reflect brokerage commissions. Total investment returns covering less than a full period are not annualized.
(3) Total investment return is calculated assuming a purchase of common shares at the current net asset value on the first day and a sale at the current net asset value on the last day of the periods reported. Dividends and distributions, if any, are assumed for purposes of this calculation to be reinvested at prices obtained under the Company’s dividend reinvestment plan. Total investment return does not reflect brokerage commissions.
(4) For the year ended February 28, 2011, net of the expense waiver and reimbursement arrangement, the ratio of net investment income, operating expenses, total expenses to average net assets is 6.87%, 11.71%, and 11.68%, respectively. For the year ended February 28, 2010, net of the expense waiver and reimbursement arrangement, the ratio of net investment income, operating expenses, total expenses to average net assets is 9.12%, 8.71% and 15.77%, respectively. For the year ended February 28, 2009, net of the expense waiver and reimbursement arrangement, the ratio of net investment income, operating expenses, total expenses to average net assets is 16.21%, 5.94% and 11.04%, respectively.
(5) Represents the dilutive effect of issuing common stock below net asset value per share during the period in connection with the satisfaction of the Company’s annual RIC distribution requirement. See Note 10, Dividend.
(6) These ratios for the years ended February 28, 2010 and 2009 do not include the effect of the waiver of deferred incentive fees which is (3.83)% on a non-annualized basis as this is a one time waiver.
(7) February 28, 2010 and 2009 data has been adjusted to reflect a one-for-ten reverse stock split effectuated in August 2010.
(8) Portfolio turnover rate is calculated using the lesser of year-to-date sales or year-to-date purchases over the average of the invested assets at fair value.
Note 13. Recapitalization Transaction
In July 2010, we consummated a recapitalization transaction that was necessitated by the fact that we had exceeded permissible borrowing limits under the Revolving Facility in July 2009, which resulted in an event of default under the Revolving Facility. As a result of the event of default under the Revolving Facility, the lender had the right to accelerate repayment of the outstanding indebtedness under the Revolving Facility and to foreclose and liquidate the collateral pledged thereunder. We engaged the investment banking firm of Stifel, Nicolaus & Company to evaluate strategic transaction opportunities and consider alternatives for us in December 2008. On April 14, 2010, we entered into a stock purchase agreement with our Manager and certain of its affiliates and an assignment, assumption and novation agreement with our Manager, pursuant to which we assumed certain rights and obligations of our Manager under a debt commitment letter our Manager received from Madison Capital Funding LLC, indicating Madison Capital Funding’s willingness to provide us with the Replacement Facility, subject to the satisfaction of certain terms and conditions. In addition, we and GSCP (NJ), L.P., our then external investment adviser, entered into a termination and release agreement, to be effective as of the closing of the transaction contemplated by the stock purchase agreement, pursuant to which GSCP (NJ), L.P., among other things, agreed to waive any and all accrued and unpaid deferred incentive management fees up to and as of the closing of the transaction contemplated by the stock purchase agreement but continued to be entitled to receive the base management fees earned through the date of the closing of the transaction contemplated by the stock purchase agreement.
On July 30, 2010, the transactions contemplated by the stock purchase agreement with our Manager and certain of its affiliates was completed, and included the following actions:
· the private sale of shares of our common stock for $15.0 million in aggregate purchase price to our Manager and certain of its affiliates;
· the closing of the $40.0 million Replacement Facility with Madison Capital Funding;
· the execution of a registration rights agreement with the investors in the private sale transaction, pursuant to which we agreed to file a registration statement with the SEC to register for resale the shares of our common stock sold in the private sale transaction;
· the execution of a trademark license agreement with our Manager pursuant to which our Manager granted us a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the “Saratoga” name, for so long as our Manager or one of its affiliates remains our investment adviser;
· replacing GSCP (NJ), L.P. as our investment adviser and administrator with our Manager by executing an investment advisory and management agreement, which was approved by our stockholders, and an administration agreement with our Manager;
· the resignations of Robert F. Cummings, Jr. and Richard M. Hayden, both of whom are affiliates of GSCP (NJ) L.P., as members of the board of directors and the election of Christian L. Oberbeck and Richard A. Petrocelli, both of whom are affiliates of our Manager, as members of the board of directors;
· the resignation of all of our then existing executive officers and the appointment by our board of directors of Mr. Oberbeck as our chief executive officer and Mr. Petrocelli as our chief financial officer, secretary and chief compliance officer; and
· our name change from “GSC Investment Corp.” to “Saratoga Investment Corp.”
We used the net proceeds from the private sale transaction and a portion of the funds available to us under the Replacement Facility to pay the full amount of principal and accrued interest, including default interest, outstanding under Revolving Facility. The Revolving Facility with Deutsche Bank was terminated in connection with our payment of all amounts outstanding thereunder on July 30, 2010.
Note 14. Selected Quarterly Data (Unaudited)
Note 15. Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events through the date of issuance of the consolidated financial statements included herein. There have been no subsequent events that occurred during such period that would require disclosure in this Form 10-K or would be required to be recognized in the consolidated financial statements as of and for the years ended February 28, 2013, except as disclosed below.
On May 10, 2013, the Company issued $42.0 million in aggregate principal amount of 7.50% fixed-rate notes due 2020. The notes will mature on May 31, 2020, and may be redeemed in whole or in part at any time or from time to time at the Company's option on or after May 31, 2016. Interest will be payable quarterly beginning August 15, 2013.
On May 17, 2013, the Company closed an additional $6.3 million in aggregate principal amount of 7.50% fixed-rate notes due 2020, pursuant to the full exercise of the underwriters' option to purchase additional notes.