e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31,
2010
|
Or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission file number 1-12139
SEALED AIR
CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
65-0654331
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
|
|
|
200 Riverfront Boulevard,
Elmwood Park, New Jersey
(Address of principal
executive offices)
|
|
07407-1033
(Zip Code)
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(201) 791-7600
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock, par value $0.10 per share
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Exchange
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
(§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such
files). Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
(§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein,
and will not be contained, to the best of registrants
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated
filer þ
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
|
Smaller
reporting
company o
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
As of the last business day of the registrants most
recently completed second fiscal quarter, June 30, 2010,
the aggregate market value of the registrants common stock
held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately
$3,206,000,000, based on the closing sale price as reported on
the New York Stock Exchange.
There were 159,305,507 shares of the registrants
common stock, par value $0.10 per share, issued and outstanding
as of January 31, 2011.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:
Portions of the registrants definitive proxy statement for
its 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be held on
May 18, 2011, are incorporated by reference into
Part III of this
Form 10-K.
SEALED
AIR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Table of
Contents
i
PART I
For over fifty years, Sealed Air Corporation has been a leading
global innovator and manufacturer of a wide range of packaging
and performance-based materials and equipment systems that serve
an array of food, industrial, medical and consumer applications.
As a leading provider in the applications we serve, we
differentiate ourselves through our:
|
|
|
|
|
extensive global reach, by which we leverage our strengths
across our 52-country footprint;
|
|
|
|
expertise in packaging sales, service, engineering and food
science;
|
|
|
|
leading brands, such as our Bubble
Wrap®
brand cushioning,
Jiffy®
protective mailers,
Instapak®
foam-in-place
systems and
Cryovac®
packaging technology;
|
|
|
|
technology leadership with an emphasis on proprietary
technologies; and
|
|
|
|
total systems offering that includes specialty materials,
equipment systems and services.
|
Our operations generate approximately 54% of our revenue from
outside the United States and approximately 16% of our revenue
from developing regions. These developing regions are Africa,
Central and Eastern Europe, China, Commonwealth of Independent
States, India, Latin America, Middle East and Southeast Asia.
We conduct substantially all of our business through two direct
wholly-owned subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air
Corporation (US). These two subsidiaries, directly and
indirectly, own substantially all of the assets of the business
and conduct operations themselves and through subsidiaries
around the world. Throughout this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
when we refer to Sealed Air, the
Company, we, us or
our, we are referring to Sealed Air Corporation and
all of our subsidiaries, except where the context indicates
otherwise. Also, when we cross reference to a Note,
we are referring to our Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements, unless the context indicates otherwise.
Our
Business Strategies
Our business is growth oriented, with goals of 5% to 6% average
annual organic sales growth (volume and product price/mix) and a
15% operating profit margin by the 2012/2013 timeframe.
The key strategic priorities developed to achieve these goals
are:
|
|
|
|
|
Innovation leadership with ongoing solution and service
development: We continue to expand our presence
in both existing and new end market applications by focusing on
innovative solutions that bring measurable value to our
customers and to end-consumers. Our distinctive systems approach
accommodates ongoing innovation in differentiated materials,
products and equipment systems, as well as integrated packaging
solutions and other services.
|
|
|
|
Growth in developing regions: With an
international focus and extensive geographic footprint, we will
leverage our broad portfolio and strengths in innovation to grow
in developing regions. Urbanization, global trade, increased
protein consumption and the conversion to safe and hygienic
packaged goods are key secular trends present in developing
regions.
|
|
|
|
Focus on cash flow and return on assets: We
focus on generating substantial operating cash flow so that we
may continue investing in innovative research and development in
the business and its strategies, and return capital to
stockholders.
|
|
|
|
Optimize processes and operations to maximize
profitability: We are focused on deriving greater
supply chain efficiencies by leveraging scale, optimizing
processes and reducing complexity and costs.
|
|
|
|
Sustainability: Our global
Smartlifetm
initiative highlights our focus and dedication to responsible
management of our business, to minimizing risks and being good
stewards of the environment and to the communities we live in
and serve. We focus on source reduction, recyclability and the
growing use of
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
renewable content, as well as efficient use of energy and other
resources through the entire life cycle of our products: from
in-house manufacturing through to the waste stream.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Develop our people: A core strength is our
people. We will grow our business through ongoing development of
key skills in a diverse workforce that abides by our Code of
Conduct.
|
Segments
We report our business publicly in four parts: three reportable
segments and an Other category.
Our reportable segments are:
1. Food Packaging;
2. Food Solutions; and
3. Protective Packaging, which includes Shrink Packaging.
Our Other category includes:
(a) Specialty Materials;
(b) Medical Applications; and
(c) New Ventures.
Information concerning our reportable segments, including net
sales, depreciation and amortization, operating profit and
assets, appears in Note 3, Segments.
Descriptions
of the Reportable Segments and Other Category
We offer a broad range of solutions across leading brands
worldwide. Approximately 60% of our total net sales in each of
the three years ended December 31, 2010 were in our food
businesses, while approximately 30% of our total net sales were
in our industrial packaging businesses (Protective Packaging
segment and Specialty Materials business). The balance of our
net sales has been primarily in our Medical Applications
business.
Food
Packaging
In this segment, we focus on the automated packaging of
perishable foods, predominantly fresh and processed meats and
cheeses. Our products are sold primarily to food processors,
distributors, supermarket retailers and foodservice businesses.
We market these products mostly under the
Cryovac®
trademark. This segments growth opportunities are targeted
toward developments in technologies that enable our customers to
package and ship their meat and cheese products effectively
through their supply chain. These technologies focus on
automation and packaging integration solutions, innovation in
material science and expansion of the sale of our products into
developing regions, where consumers continue to increase their
protein consumption and are transitioning to packaged products.
Our Food Packaging segment offerings include:
|
|
|
|
|
shrink bags to vacuum package many fresh food products,
including beef, lamb, pork, poultry and seafood, as well as
cheese and smoked and processed meats;
|
|
|
|
packaging materials for cook-in applications, predominately for
deli and foodservice businesses;
|
|
|
|
a wide range of laminated and coextruded rollstock packaging
materials utilized in thermoforming and form, fill and seal
applications, providing an effective packaging option for a
variety of fresh meat, smoked and processed meat, seafood,
poultry and cheese applications;
|
|
|
|
packaging trays; and
|
|
|
|
associated packaging equipment and systems, including bag
loaders, dispensers and vacuum chamber systems.
|
2
Some of our more recent product offerings in this segment are:
|
|
|
|
|
Oven
Easetm
ovenable bag for bone-in or boneless meat and poultry products;
|
|
|
|
Cryovac
Roboloader®
system, which combines a product-detecting conveyor, which
measures a products width, and, using a robotic arm,
selects and opens the corresponding bag for the products
size from one of up to six dispensing units;
|
|
|
|
PakFormancetm
integrated packaging solutions systems combining
hardware, software, equipment and services that give food
processors control and oversight of the food packaging process;
|
|
|
|
Multi-Seal®
package, an easy open and reclosable deli package;
|
|
|
|
Freshness
Plus®
oxygen scavenging systems and odor scavenging materials;
|
|
|
|
Cryovac Grip &
Tear®
bags, easy-open end-seal bags for fresh meats, poultry, and
smoked and processed products;
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
BL145 and BL175 automatic loaders for roll-serrated bags and
equipment systems for rollstock form fill shrink materials,
which provide labor saving opportunities for fresh meat and
smoked and processed meat applications; and
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
CNP310 heavy bags for post-packaging pasteurization of smoked
and processed products.
|
Food
Solutions
In this segment, we target advanced food packaging technologies
that provide consumers convenient access to fresh, consistently
prepared, high-quality meals, either from foodservice outlets or
from expanding retail cases at grocery stores. We sell the
products in this reportable segment primarily to food
processors, distributors, supermarket retailers and foodservice
businesses. Our trademarks in this segment include
Cryovac®,
Simple
Steps®
and
Darfresh®.
This segments growth strategy is focused on developing
convenience-oriented solutions through material science and
innovative end applications that serve both consumers and the
commercial chef.
Our Food Solutions segment offerings include:
|
|
|
|
|
case-ready packaging offerings that are utilized in the
centralized packaging of various proteins, including beef, lamb,
poultry, smoked and processed meats, seafood and cheese, for
retail sale at the consumer level;
|
|
|
|
ready meals packaging, including our Simple
Steps®
package, a microwavable package designed with vacuum skin
packaging technology and a unique self-venting feature, as well
as our flex-tray-flex package, which is an oven-compatible
package that utilizes skin-pack technology;
|
|
|
|
vertical pouch packaging systems for packaging flowable food
products, including soups, sauces, salads, meats, toppings and
syrups, including film and filling equipment systems for
products utilizing hot and ambient, retort and aseptic
processing methods;
|
|
|
|
packaging solutions for produce, bakery goods and pizza,
including our Cryovac
PizzaFresh®
offering;
|
|
|
|
Entapack®
intermediate bulk container products, which are used in the
food, beverage and industrial processing industries for storage
and transportation of primarily liquid material;
|
|
|
|
foam and solid plastic trays and containers that customers use
to package a wide variety of food products;
|
|
|
|
absorbent products used for food packaging, such as our
Dri-Loc®
absorbent pads; and
|
|
|
|
related packaging equipment systems, including vertical pouch
packaging systems and vacuum chamber systems.
|
Some of our more recent new product offerings in this segment
are:
|
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
BDF®
Soft, a high performance barrier over-wrap film;
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
Darfresh®
Ultra, an extended shelf life skin packaging system;
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
Flavour
Marktm
packaging materials and systems for shelf stable applications;
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
Permelidtm
lid materials for applications requiring high oxygen
transmission; and
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
new generation
Darfresh®
XT, a high performance skin top web.
|
Outsourced
Products
Approximately 17% of the products we sell in this segment are
fabricated by other manufacturers and are referred to as
outsourced products. The largest category of outsourced products
is foam and solid plastic trays and containers fabricated in
North America, Europe and Asia. We also outsource the
manufacture of selected equipment. We have strategically opted
to use third-party manufacturers for technically less complex
products in order to offer customers a broader range of
solutions. We have benefited from this strategy with increased
net sales and operating profit requiring minimal capital
expenditures. See Outsourced Products, included in
Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations, for further
information. Our Food Packaging and Protective Packaging
segments also sell outsourced products, but they represent a
much smaller percent of their revenue.
Protective
Packaging
This segment comprises our core protective packaging
technologies and solutions aimed at traditional industrial
applications as well as consumer-oriented packaging solutions.
We aggregate our protective packaging products and shrink
packaging products into our Protective Packaging segment for
reporting purposes. We sell products in this segment primarily
to distributors and manufacturers in a wide variety of
industries as well as to retailers and to
e-commerce
and mail order fulfillment firms. This segments growth is
focused on providing a broader range of protective packaging
products and solutions worldwide by focusing on advancements in
material science, automation, and the development of reliable
customer equipment. We target markets that serve both developed
and developing regions.
Our Protective Packaging segment offerings include:
|
|
|
|
|
Bubble
Wrap®
brand and
AirCap®
brand air cellular packaging materials, which employ a
barrier layer that retains air for longer lasting
protection, forming a pneumatic cushion to protect products from
damage through shock or vibration during shipment;
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®,
Opti®
and
CorTuff®
polyolefin performance shrink films for product display,
bundling and merchandising applications, which customers use to
shrink-wrap a wide assortment of industrial,
consumer, and food products;
|
|
|
|
Shanklin®
and
Opti®
shrink packaging equipment systems;
|
|
|
|
Instapak®
polyurethane foam packaging systems, which consist of
proprietary blends of polyurethane chemicals, high performance
polyolefin films and specially designed dispensing equipment
that provide protective packaging for a wide variety of
applications;
|
|
|
|
Jiffy®
mailers and bags, including lightweight, tear-resistant mailers
lined with air cellular cushioning material that are marketed
under the
Jiffylite®
and
TuffGard®
trademarks,
Jiffy®
padded mailers made from recycled kraft paper padded with
macerated recycled newspaper, and
Jiffy®
ShurTuff®
bags composed of multi-layered polyolefin film;
|
|
|
|
PackTiger®
paper cushioning system, a versatile high-speed paper packaging
solution that includes both recycled paper and automated
dispensing equipment;
|
|
|
|
Kushion
Kraft®,
Custom
Wraptm,
Jiffy
Packer®
and Void
Krafttm
paper packaging products;
|
|
|
|
Korrvu®
suspension and retention packaging;
|
|
|
|
inflatable packaging systems, including our
Fill-Air®
inflatable packaging system, which converts rolls of
polyethylene film into continuous perforated chains of
air-filled cushions, our
Fill-Air®
RF system, which consists of a compact, portable inflator and
self-sealing inflatable plastic bags, which is also available in
a
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
fully automated model, and our NewAir
I.B.®
Express packaging system, which provides
on-site,
on-demand Barrier
Bubble®
cushioning material;
|
|
|
|
|
|
PriorityPak®
system, a high-speed product containment and protective
packaging solution with advanced sensor technology, used for
mail order and internet fulfillment applications;
|
|
|
|
systems that convert some of our packaging materials, such as
air cellular cushioning materials, thin polyethylene foam and
paper, into sheets of a pre-selected size and quantity; and
|
|
|
|
FillTecktm
line of equipment and materials marketed by us for applications
requiring
on-site
production of high performance, air-filled, quilted cushioning
material.
|
Some of our more recent product offerings in this segment are:
|
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
CT-301®,
CT-501tm,
and
CT-701tm
ultra-thin high performance polyolefin shrink films;
|
|
|
|
Cryovac®
360 Shrink Sleeve films sold to converters for shrink labeling
and shrink bundling applications in a wide variety of industrial
and consumer goods;
|
|
|
|
Instapak
Complete®
foam-in-bag
packaging system, a compact bench-mounted system that
incorporates advanced continuous foam tube technology;
|
|
|
|
Instapak®
RC45 foam containing 25% renewable content, our first renewable
content
Instapak®
foam formulation;
|
|
|
|
Bubble
Wrap®
Brand Recycled Grade containing a minimum of 50% pre-consumer
recycled content the highest recycled content air
cellular cushioning;
|
|
|
|
Fill-Air
Cyclone®
inflatable packaging system, which produces high volume void
fill packaging materials from a compact footprint;
|
|
|
|
FasFiltm
packaging system, which creates void-fill pads from 100%
recycled paper;
|
|
|
|
PakNaturaltm
loosefill, which is sourced from a renewable material that
offers better cushioning performance while remaining cost
competitive; and
|
|
|
|
Korrvu®
Hybrid retention packaging represents a new design that is more
efficient and economical to employ, especially with low profile
electronics.
|
Other
We also focus on growth by utilizing our technologies in new
market segments. This category includes specialty materials
serving both packaging and non-packaging applications and
medical products and applications. Additionally, this category
includes several of our new ventures, such as vacuum insulated
panels.
Specialty
Materials
Our Specialty Materials business seeks to expand our product
portfolio and core competencies into specialized and
non-packaging applications and new market segments. We sell
specialty materials products primarily to fabricators and
manufacturers encompassing a wide array of businesses and end
uses.
Our Specialty Materials offerings include:
|
|
|
|
|
Ethafoam®,
Stratocell®
and
Cellu-Cushion®
family of foams, which are available in a variety of densities
and colors and with a wide range of performance characteristics,
including low abrasion, anti-static, formable, moisture barrier,
gas barrier, printable, shrinkable and adhesive applications;
|
|
|
|
foams, films and composites for non-packaging markets, including
transportation, construction, sports and leisure, and personal
care;
|
|
|
|
temperature controlled supply chain products, including our
TurboTag®
system, a temperature monitoring product for pharmaceutical,
biological and food industry customers; and
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
super-insulation products utilizing thermal insulation in the
form of vacuum insulated panels that provide energy efficiency
for specialized packaging, such as aerospace, pharmaceutical and
biological applications, and non-packaging applications.
|
Two of our newest products in this category are our
Ethafoam®
HRC (High Recycled Content) polyethylene foam, containing a
minimum of 65% pre-consumer recycled content, and our
Ethafoam®
MRC (Maximum Recycled Content) Polyethylene foam, containing
100% pre-consumer recycled content.
Medical
Applications
The goal of our Medical Applications business is to provide
solutions offering superior protection and reliability to the
medical, pharmaceutical and medical device industries. We sell
medical applications products directly to medical device
manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies and to the contract
packaging firms that supply them.
Our medical applications offerings include:
|
|
|
|
|
flexible films, tubing and connectors for use in the manufacture
of bags and pouches for a wide variety of medical applications
including ostomy, IV and solution drug therapies, and medical
devices;
|
|
|
|
custom designed, rigid thermoformed packaging materials for
medical devices and technical products; and
|
|
|
|
equipment to seal thermoformed trays to lidding materials.
|
New
Ventures
Our New Ventures area includes several development projects that
include technologies and solutions sourced from renewable
materials, proprietary process technologies that have
opportunity for application within our manufacturing processes
and for future licensing, as well as equipment systems that
offer an automated packaging service for high-volume fulfillment
or
pick-and-pack
operators. Two examples of development projects are our
I-Pack®
and
Ultipack®
automated void reduction and containment systems that provide
efficient, automated packaging processes that minimize carton
sizes and void fill requirements. These systems are being
offered as a service and sold using a unique per-package charge
model.
Foreign
Operations
We operate through our subsidiaries and have a presence in the
United States and in the 51 other countries listed below,
enabling us to distribute our products in 77 countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americas
|
|
Europe, Middle East and Africa
|
|
Asia-Pacific
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Argentina
|
|
Austria
|
|
Netherlands
|
|
Australia
|
Brazil
|
|
Belgium
|
|
Norway
|
|
China
|
Canada
|
|
Czech Republic
|
|
Poland
|
|
India
|
Chile
|
|
Denmark
|
|
Portugal
|
|
Indonesia
|
Colombia
|
|
Finland
|
|
Romania
|
|
Japan
|
Costa Rica
|
|
France
|
|
Russia
|
|
Malaysia
|
Ecuador
|
|
Germany
|
|
South Africa
|
|
New Zealand
|
Guatemala
|
|
Greece
|
|
Spain
|
|
Philippines
|
Mexico
|
|
Hungary
|
|
Sweden
|
|
Singapore
|
Peru
|
|
Ireland
|
|
Switzerland
|
|
South Korea
|
Uruguay
|
|
Israel
|
|
Turkey
|
|
Taiwan
|
Venezuela
|
|
Italy
|
|
Ukraine
|
|
Thailand
|
|
|
Luxembourg
|
|
United Kingdom
|
|
Vietnam
|
In maintaining our foreign operations, we face risks inherent in
these operations, such as currency fluctuations, inflation and
political instability. Information on currency exchange risk
appears in Part II, Item 7A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
which information is incorporated herein by reference. Other
risks attendant to our foreign
6
operations are set forth in Part I, Item 1A,
Risk Factors, of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
which information is incorporated herein by reference. Financial
information showing net sales and total long-lived assets by
geographic region for each of the three years ended
December 31, 2010 appears in Note 3,
Segments, which information is incorporated herein
by reference. We maintain programs to comply with the various
laws, rules and regulations related to the protection of the
environment that we may be subject to in the many countries in
which we operate. See Environmental Matters, below.
Employees
As of December 31, 2010, we had approximately
16,100 employees worldwide. Approximately 6,800 of these
employees were in the U.S., with approximately 100 of these
employees covered by collective bargaining agreements. Of the
approximately 9,300 employees who were outside the U.S.,
approximately 6,300 were covered by collective bargaining
agreements. Outside of the U.S., many of the covered employees
are represented by works councils or industrial boards, as is
customary in the jurisdictions in which they are employed. We
believe that our employee relations are satisfactory.
Marketing,
Distribution and Customers
At December 31, 2010, we employed approximately 2,300
sales, marketing and customer service personnel throughout the
world who sell and market our products to and through a large
number of distributors, fabricators, converters,
e-commerce
and mail order fulfillment firms, and contract packaging firms
as well as directly to end-users such as food processors,
foodservice businesses, supermarket retailers, pharmaceutical
companies, medical device manufacturers and other manufacturers.
To support our food packaging, food solutions and new ventures
customers, we operate two food science laboratories and three
Packforum®
innovation and learning centers that are located in the U.S.,
France, and China. At
Packforum®,
we assist customers in identifying the appropriate packaging
materials and systems to meet their needs. We also offer
ideation services, educational seminars, employee training and
customized graphic design services to our customers.
To assist our marketing efforts for our protective packaging
products and to provide specialized customer services, we
operate 35 industrial package design and development
laboratories worldwide within our facilities. These laboratories
are staffed by professional packaging engineers and equipped
with drop-testing and other equipment used to develop and test
cost-effective package designs to meet the particular protective
packaging requirements of each customer.
We operate five equipment design centers in three countries that
focus on equipment and parts design and innovation to support
the development of comprehensive systems solutions. We also
provide field technical services to our customers worldwide.
These services include system installation, integration and
monitoring systems, repair and upgrade, operator training in the
efficient use of packaging systems, qualification of various
consumable and system combinations, and packaging line layout
and design.
Our Medical Applications business offers two cleanroom contract
assembly and packaging facilities in two countries, as well as a
packaging validation lab. We also operate two equipment and
medical device packaging labs in two countries that support
customers package design needs and packaging equipment
systems.
We have no material long-term contracts for the distribution of
our products. In 2010, no customer or affiliated group of
customers accounted for 10% or more of our consolidated net
sales.
Seasonality
Historically, net sales in our food businesses have tended to be
slightly lower in the first quarter and slightly higher towards
the end of the third quarter through the fourth quarter, due to
holiday events. Our Protective Packaging segment has tended to
also be slightly lower in the first quarter and higher during
the
back-to-school
season in the mid-third quarter and through the fourth quarter
due to the holiday shopping season.
7
Competition
Competition for most of our packaging products is based
primarily on packaging performance characteristics, service and
price. Since competition is also based upon innovations in
packaging technology, we maintain ongoing research and
development programs to enable us to maintain technological
leadership. We invest approximately double the industry average
on research and development as a percentage of net sales per
year. There are also other companies producing competing
products that are well-established.
There are other manufacturers of food packaging and food
solutions products, some of which are companies offering similar
products that operate across regions and others that operate in
a single region or single country. Competing manufacturers
produce a wide variety of food packaging based on plastic,
metals and other materials. We believe that we are one of the
leading suppliers of (i) flexible food packaging materials
and related systems in the principal geographic areas in which
we offer those products, (ii) barrier trays for case-ready
meat products in the principal geographic areas in which we
offers those trays, and (iii) absorbent pads for food
products to supermarkets and to meat and poultry processors in
the United States.
Our protective packaging products compete with similar products
made by other manufacturers and with a number of other packaging
materials that customers use to provide protection against
damage to their products during shipment and storage. Among the
competitive materials are various forms of paper packaging
products, expanded plastics, corrugated die cuts, strapping,
envelopes, reinforced bags, boxes and other containers, and
various corrugated materials, as well as various types of molded
foam plastics, fabricated foam plastics, mechanical shock
mounts, and wood blocking and bracing systems. We believe that
we are one of the leading suppliers of air cellular cushioning
materials containing a barrier layer, inflatable packaging,
suspension and retention packaging, shrink films for industrial
and commercial applications, protective mailers, polyethylene
foam and polyurethane foam packaging systems in the principal
geographic areas in which we sell these products.
Competition in specialty materials is focused on performance
characteristics and price. Competition for most of our medical
applications products is based primarily on performance
characteristics, service and price. Technical design capability
is an additional competitive factor for the rigid packaging
offered by the Medical Applications business.
Raw
Materials
Our principal raw materials are polyolefin and other
petrochemical-based resins and films, and paper and wood pulp
products. These raw materials represent approximately one-third
of our consolidated cost of goods sold. We also purchase
corrugated materials, cores for rolls of products such as films
and Bubble
Wrap®
brand cushioning, inks for printed materials, and blowing agents
used in the expansion of foam packaging products. In addition,
we offer a wide variety of specialized packaging equipment, some
of which we manufacture or have manufactured to our
specifications, some of which we assemble and some of which we
purchase from suppliers.
The raw materials for our products generally have been readily
available on the open market and in most cases are available
from several suppliers. However, we have some sole-source
suppliers, and the lack of availability of supplies could have a
material negative impact on our business. Natural disasters such
as hurricanes, as well as political instability and terrorist
activities, may negatively impact the production or delivery
capabilities of refineries and natural gas and petrochemical
suppliers in the future. These factors could lead to increased
prices for our raw materials, curtailment of supplies and
allocation of raw materials by our suppliers. We source some
materials used in our packaging products from materials recycled
in our manufacturing operations or obtained through
participation in recycling programs.
Sourcing
We have a centralized supply chain organization, which includes
the centralized management of procurement and logistic
activities. Our objective is to leverage our global scale to
achieve sourcing efficiencies and reduce our total delivered
cost across all our regions. We do this while adhering to
strategic performance metrics and stringent sourcing practices.
8
Research
and Development Activities
We maintain a continuing effort to develop new products and
improve our existing products and processes, including
developing new packaging and non-packaging applications using
our intellectual property. From time to time, we also acquire
and commercialize new packaging and other products or techniques
developed by others. Our research and development projects rely
on our technical capabilities in the areas of food science,
materials science, package design and equipment engineering. We
spent $88 million in 2010, $81 million in 2009 and
$86 million in 2008 on research and development.
Patents
and Trademarks
We are the owner or licensee of an aggregate of over 2,500
United States and foreign patents and patent applications, as
well as an aggregate of over 3,000 United States and foreign
trademark registrations and trademark applications that relate
to many of our products, manufacturing processes and equipment.
We believe that our patents and trademarks collectively provide
a competitive advantage. As such, each year we continue to file,
in the aggregate, an average of 200 United States and foreign
patent applications and 200 United States and foreign trademark
applications. None of our reportable segments is dependent upon
any single patent or trademark alone. Rather, we believe that
our success depends primarily on our sales and service,
marketing, engineering and manufacturing skills and on our
ongoing research and development efforts. We believe that the
expiration or unenforceability of any of our patents,
applications, licenses or trademark registrations would not be
material to our business or consolidated financial position.
Environmental,
Health and Safety Matters
As a manufacturer, we are subject to various laws, rules and
regulations in the countries, jurisdictions and localities in
which we operate. These cover: the safe storage and use of raw
materials and production chemicals; the release of materials
into the environment; standards for the treatment, storage and
disposal of solid and hazardous wastes; or otherwise relate to
the protection of the environment. We review environmental,
health and safety laws and regulations pertaining to our
operations and believe that compliance with current
environmental and workplace health and safety laws and
regulations has not had a material effect on our capital
expenditures or consolidated financial position.
In some jurisdictions in which our packaging products are sold
or used, laws and regulations have been adopted or proposed that
seek to regulate, among other things, minimum levels of recycled
or reprocessed content and, more generally, the sale or disposal
of packaging materials. In addition, customer demand continues
to evolve for packaging materials that incorporate renewable
materials or that are otherwise viewed as being
environmentally sound. Our new venture activities,
described above, include the development of packaging products
from renewable resources. We maintain programs designed to
comply with these laws and regulations, to monitor their
evolution, and to meet this customer demand. One advantage
inherent in many of our products is that thin, lightweight
packaging solutions reduce waste and transportation costs in
comparison to available alternatives. We continue to evaluate
and implement new technologies in this area as they become
available.
We also support our customers interests in eliminating
waste by offering or participating in collection programs for
some of our products or product packaging and for materials used
in some of our products. When possible, materials collected
through these programs are reprocessed and either reused in our
protective packaging operations or offered to other
manufacturers for use in other products. In addition, gains that
we have made in internal recycling programs have allowed us to
improve our net raw material yield, thus mitigating the impact
of resin costs, while lowering solid waste disposal costs and
controlling environmental liability risks associated with waste
disposal.
Our emphasis on environmental, health and safety compliance
provides us with risk reduction opportunities and cost savings
through asset protection and protection of employees, for which
we are recognized as leaders in our industry. Our website,
www.sealedair.com, contains additional detailed
information about our corporate citizenship initiatives.
9
Available
Information
Our Internet address is www.sealedair.com. We make
available, free of charge, on or through our website at
www.sealedair.com, our Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K,
and amendments to those reports that we file or furnish pursuant
to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, or the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable
after we electronically file these materials with, or furnish
them to, the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Introduction
Investors should carefully consider the risks described below
before making an investment decision. These are the most
significant risk factors; however, they are not the only risk
factors that you should consider in making an investment
decision.
This Annual Report on
Form 10-K
also contains and may incorporate by reference from our Proxy
Statement for our 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, or from
exhibits, forward-looking statements that involve risks and
uncertainties. See the Cautionary Notice Regarding
Forward-Looking Statements below. Our actual results could
differ materially from those anticipated in these
forward-looking statements as a result of many factors,
including the risks that we face, which are described below and
elsewhere in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
or in documents incorporated by reference in this report.
Our business, consolidated financial position or results of
operations could be materially adversely affected by any of
these risks. The trading price of our securities could decline
due to any of these risks, and investors in our securities may
lose all or part of their investment.
Weakened
global economic conditions have had and could continue to have
an adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and
results of operations.
Weakened global economic conditions have had and may continue to
have an adverse impact on our business in the form of lower net
sales due to weakened demand, unfavorable changes in product
price/mix, or lower profit margins.
During periods of economic recession, there can be a heightened
competition for sales and increased pressure to reduce selling
prices. If we lose significant sales volume or reduce selling
prices significantly, then there could be a negative impact on
our consolidated revenue, profitability and cash flows.
Also, reduced availability of credit may adversely affect the
ability of some of our customers and suppliers to obtain funds
for operations and capital expenditures. This could negatively
impact our ability to obtain necessary supplies as well as our
sales of materials and equipment to affected customers. This
also could result in reduced or delayed collections of
outstanding accounts receivable.
The
global nature of our operations in the United States and in 51
foreign countries exposes us to numerous risks that could
materially adversely affect our consolidated financial position
and results of operations.
We operate in the United States and in 51 other countries, and
our products are distributed in those countries as well as in
other parts of the world. A large portion of our manufacturing
operations are located outside of the United States.
Operations outside of the United States, particularly operations
in developing regions, are subject to various risks that may not
be present or as significant for our U.S. operations.
Economic uncertainty in some of the geographic regions in which
we operate, including developing regions, could result in the
disruption of commerce and negatively impact cash flows from our
operations in those areas.
Risks inherent in our international operations include social
plans that prohibit or increase the cost of certain
restructuring actions; exchange controls; foreign currency
exchange rate fluctuations including devaluations; the potential
for changes in local economic conditions including local
inflationary pressures; restrictive governmental actions such as
those on transfer or repatriation of funds and trade protection
matters, including antidumping duties, tariffs, embargoes and
prohibitions or restrictions on acquisitions or joint ventures;
changes in laws and regulations,
10
including the laws and policies of the United States affecting
trade and foreign investment; the difficulty of enforcing
agreements and collecting receivables through certain foreign
legal systems; variations in protection of intellectual property
and other legal rights; more expansive legal rights of foreign
unions or works councils; the potential for nationalization of
enterprises or facilities; and unsettled political conditions
and possible terrorist attacks against United States or other
interests. In addition, there are potential tax inefficiencies
in repatriating funds from our
non-U.S. subsidiaries.
These and other factors may have a material adverse effect on
our international operations and, consequently, on our
consolidated financial position and results of operations.
If the
settlement of the asbestos-related claims that we have agreed to
(the Settlement agreement) is not implemented, we
will not be released from the various asbestos-related,
fraudulent transfer, successor liability, and indemnification
claims made against us arising from a 1998 transaction with W.
R. Grace & Co. We are also a defendant in a number of
asbestos-related actions in Canada arising from W. R.
Grace & Co.s activities in Canada prior to the
1998 transaction.
On November 27, 2002, we reached an agreement in principle
with the Official Committee of Asbestos Personal Injury
Claimants (the ACC) and the Official Committee of
Asbestos Property Damage Claimants appointed to represent
asbestos claimants in the W. R. Grace & Co.
(Grace) bankruptcy case to resolve all current and
future asbestos-related claims made against us and our
affiliates. The Settlement agreement will also resolve the
fraudulent transfer claims and successor liability claims, as
well as indemnification claims by Fresenius Medical Care
Holdings, Inc. and affiliated companies in connection with the
Cryovac transaction. The Cryovac transaction was a multi-step
transaction, completed on March 31, 1998, which brought the
Cryovac packaging business and the former Sealed Air
Corporations business under the common ownership of the
Company. The parties to the agreement in principle signed the
definitive Settlement agreement as of November 10, 2003
consistent with the terms of the agreement in principle. On
June 27, 2005, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the
District of Delaware, where the Grace bankruptcy case is
pending, signed an order approving the definitive Settlement
agreement. Although Grace is not a party to the Settlement
agreement, under the terms of the order, Grace is directed to
comply with the Settlement agreement subject to limited
exceptions. On September 19, 2008, Grace, the ACC, the
Asbestos PI Future Claimants Representative (the
FCR), and the Official Committee of Equity Security
Holders (the Equity Committee) filed, as
co-proponents, a plan of reorganization (as filed and amended
from time to time, the PI Settlement Plan) and
several exhibits and associated documents, including a
disclosure statement (as filed and amended from time to time,
the PI Settlement Disclosure Statement), with the
Bankruptcy Court. As filed, the PI Settlement Plan would provide
for the establishment of two asbestos trusts under
Section 524(g) of the United States Bankruptcy Code to
which present and future asbestos-related claims would be
channeled. The PI Settlement Plan also contemplates that the
terms of our definitive Settlement agreement will be
incorporated into the PI Settlement Plan and that we will pay
the amount contemplated by that agreement.
On January 31, 2011, the Bankruptcy Court entered a
memorandum opinion (the Memorandum Opinion)
overruling certain objections to the PI Settlement Plan. On the
same date, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order regarding
confirmation of the PI Settlement Plan (the Confirmation
Order). As entered on January 31, 2011, the
Confirmation Order contained recommended findings of fact and
conclusions of law, and recommended that the U.S. District
Court for the District of Delaware (the District
Court) approve the Confirmation Order, and that the
District Court confirm the PI Settlement Plan and issue a
channeling injunction under Section 524(g) of the
Bankruptcy Code. Thereafter, on February 15, 2011, the
Bankruptcy Court issued an order clarifying its Memorandum
Opinion and Confirmation Order (the Clarifying
Order). Among other things, the Clarifying Order provided
that any references in the Memorandum Opinion and Confirmation
Order to a recommendation that the District Court confirm the PI
Settlement Plan were thereby amended to make clear that the PI
Settlement Plan was confirmed and that the Bankruptcy Court was
requesting that the District Court issue and affirm the
Confirmation Order including the injunction under
Section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code.
If it becomes effective, the PI Settlement Plan may implement
the terms of the Settlement agreement, but there can be no
assurance that this will be the case notwithstanding the
Bankruptcy Courts confirmation of the PI Settlement Plan.
The terms of the PI Settlement Plan remain subject to amendment.
Moreover, the PI Settlement Plan is subject to the satisfaction
of a number of conditions which are more fully set forth in the
PI Settlement Plan
11
and include, without limitation, the availability of exit
financing and the approval of the PI Settlement Plan by the
District Court. Additionally, various parties have filed notices
of appeal or have otherwise challenged the Memorandum Opinion
and Confirmation Order, and the PI Settlement Plan may be
subject to further appeal or challenge by additional parties.
Parties filed a number of objections to the PI Settlement Plan,
and some of these objections concerned injunctions, releases and
provisions as applied to us
and/or that
are contemplated by the Settlement agreement. Such parties (or
others) may appeal or otherwise challenge the Bankruptcy
Courts Memorandum Opinion and Confirmation Order, or
otherwise continue to oppose the PI Settlement Plan.
While the Bankruptcy Court has confirmed the PI Settlement Plan,
additional proceedings may be held before the District Court or
other courts to consider matters related to the PI Settlement
Plan. We do not know whether or when a final plan of
reorganization will become effective. Assuming that a final plan
of reorganization (whether the PI Settlement Plan or another
plan of reorganization) is confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court,
approved by the District Court, and does become effective, we do
not know whether the final plan of reorganization will be
consistent with the terms of the Settlement agreement and if the
other conditions to our obligation to pay the Settlement
agreement amount will be met. If these conditions are not
satisfied or not waived by us, we will not be obligated to pay
the amount contemplated by the Settlement agreement. However, if
we do not pay the Settlement agreement amount, we and our
affiliates will not be released from the various claims against
us.
If the Settlement agreement does not become effective, either
because Grace fails to emerge from bankruptcy or because Grace
does not emerge from bankruptcy with a plan of reorganization
that is consistent with the terms of the Settlement agreement,
then we and our affiliates will not be released from the various
asbestos-related, fraudulent transfer, successor liability, and
indemnification claims made against us and our affiliates noted
above, and all of these claims would remain pending and would
have to be resolved through other means, such as through
agreement on alternative settlement terms or trials. In that
case, we could face liabilities that are significantly different
from our obligations under the Settlement agreement. We cannot
estimate at this time what those differences or their magnitude
may be. In the event these liabilities are materially larger
than the current existing obligations, they could have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position
and results of operations.
Since November 2004, the Company and specified subsidiaries have
been named as defendants in a number of cases, including a
number of putative class actions, brought in Canada as a result
of Graces alleged marketing, manufacturing or distributing
of asbestos or asbestos containing products in Canada prior to
the Cryovac transaction in 1998. Grace has agreed to defend and
indemnify us and our subsidiaries in these cases. The Canadian
cases are currently stayed. A global settlement of these
Canadian claims to be funded by Grace has been approved by the
Canadian court, and the PI Settlement Plan provides for payment
of these claims. We do not have any positive obligations under
the Canadian settlement, but we are a beneficiary of the release
of claims. The release in favor of the Grace parties (including
us) will become operative upon the effective date of a plan of
reorganization in Graces United States Chapter 11
bankruptcy proceeding. As filed, the PI Settlement Plan
contemplates that the claims released under the Canadian
settlement will be subject to injunctions under
Section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code. By its terms, the
Canadian settlement will, unless amended, become null and void
if a confirmation order in the Grace U.S. bankruptcy
proceeding is not granted prior to July 31, 2011. As
indicated above, the Bankruptcy Court entered the Confirmation
Order on January 31, 2011 and the Clarifying Order on
February 15, 2011; however, we can give no assurance that
the PI Settlement Plan (or any other plan of reorganization)
will be approved by the District Court, or will become
effective. Assuming that a final plan of reorganization (whether
the PI Settlement Plan or another plan of reorganization) is
confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court, approved by the District
Court, and does become effective, if the final plan of
reorganization does not incorporate the terms of the Canadian
settlement or if the Canadian courts refuse to enforce the final
plan of reorganization in the Canadian courts, and if in
addition Grace is unwilling or unable to defend and indemnify us
and our subsidiaries in these cases, then we could be required
to pay substantial damages, which we cannot estimate at this
time and which could have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated financial position and results of operations.
For further information concerning these matters, see
Note 16, Commitments and Contingencies, of
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under the caption
Cryovac Transaction Commitments and Contingencies.
12
A
downgrade of our credit ratings could have a negative impact on
our costs and ability to access credit markets.
Our cost of capital and ability to obtain external financing may
be affected by our debt ratings, which the credit rating
agencies review periodically. The Company and our long-term
senior unsecured debt are currently rated BB+ (positive outlook)
by Standard & Poors Financial Services LLC. On
November 18, 2010, Standard & Poors revised
our ratings outlook to positive from stable. This rating is
considered non-investment grade. The Company and our long-term
senior unsecured debt are currently rated Baa3 by Moodys
Investor Service, Inc. This rating is considered investment
grade. On May 4, 2010, Moodys revised our ratings
outlook to stable from negative. If our credit ratings are
downgraded, there could be a negative impact on our ability to
access capital markets and borrowing costs could increase. A
credit rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold
securities and may be subject to revision or withdrawal at any
time by the rating organization. Each rating should be evaluated
independently of any other rating.
Raw
material pricing, availability and allocation by suppliers as
well as energy-related costs may negatively impact our results
of operations, including our profit margins.
We use petrochemical-based raw materials to manufacture many of
our products. Increases in market demand or fluctuations in the
global trade for petrochemical-based raw materials and energy
could increase our costs. We also have some sole-source
suppliers, and the lack of availability of supplies could have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition
and results of operations.
Natural disasters such as hurricanes, as well as political
instability and terrorist activities, may negatively impact the
production or delivery capabilities of refineries and natural
gas and petrochemical suppliers in the future. These factors
could lead to increased prices for our raw materials,
curtailment of supplies and allocation of raw materials by our
suppliers, which could reduce revenues and profit margins and
harm relations with our customers and which could have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition
and results of operations.
The
effects of animal and food-related health issues such as bovine
spongiform encephalopathy, also known as mad cow
disease,
foot-and-mouth
disease and avian influenza or bird-flu, as well as
other health issues affecting the food industry, may lead to
decreased revenues.
We manufacture and sell food packaging products, among other
products. Various health issues affecting the food industry have
in the past and may in the future have a negative effect on the
sales of food packaging products. In recent years, occasional
cases of mad cow disease have been confirmed and incidents of
bird flu have surfaced in various countries. Outbreaks of animal
diseases may lead governments to restrict exports and imports of
potentially affected animals and food products, leading to
decreased demand for our products and possibly also to the
culling or slaughter of significant numbers of the animal
population otherwise intended for food supply. Also, consumers
may change their eating habits as a result of perceived problems
with certain types of food. These factors may lead to reduced
sales of food businesses products, which could have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position
and results of operations.
Concerns
about greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate change and the
resulting governmental and market responses to these issues
could increase costs that we incur and could otherwise affect
our consolidated financial position and results of
operations.
Numerous legislative and regulatory initiatives have been
enacted and proposed in response to concerns about GHG emissions
and climate change. We are a manufacturing entity that utilizes
petrochemical-based raw materials to produce many of our
products, including plastic packaging materials. Increased
environmental legislation or regulation could result in higher
costs for us in the form of higher raw materials and freight and
energy costs. We could also incur additional compliance costs
for monitoring and reporting emissions and for maintaining
permits. It is also possible that certain materials might cease
to be permitted to be used in our processes.
13
Disruption
and volatility of the financial and credit markets could affect
our external liquidity sources.
Our principal sources of liquidity are accumulated cash and cash
equivalents, short-term investments, cash flow from operations
and amounts available under our existing lines of credit,
including our global credit facility, our European credit
facility, and our accounts receivable securitization program (as
described in Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations, which is included
in Part II, Item 7 of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K).
Our accounts receivable securitization program includes a bank
financing commitment that must be renewed annually prior to the
expiration date. The bank commitment is scheduled to expire on
December 2, 2011. While the bank is not obligated to renew
the bank financing commitment, we have negotiated annual
renewals since the commencement of the program in 2001.
Additionally, conditions in financial markets could affect
financial institutions with which we have relationships and
could result in adverse effects on our ability to utilize fully
our committed borrowing facilities. For example, a lender under
our global credit facility or the European credit facility may
be unwilling or unable to fund a borrowing request, and we may
not be able to replace such lender.
Covenant
restrictions under our credit arrangements may pose a
risk.
We have a number of credit facilities, including our global
credit facility, our European credit facility, and our accounts
receivable securitization program, and debt securities we have
issued, to manage liquidity and fund operations (as described in
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations, which is included in Part II,
Item 7 of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K).
The agreements relating to these facilities and securities
generally contain certain restrictive covenants, including the
incurrence of additional indebtedness, restriction of liens and
sale and leaseback transactions, financial covenants relating to
interest coverage, debt leverage and minimum liquidity, and
restrictions on consolidation and merger transactions, as well
as, in some cases, restrictions on amendments to the Settlement
agreement. In addition, amounts available under our accounts
receivable securitization program can be impacted by a number of
factors, including but not limited to our credit ratings,
accounts receivable balances, the creditworthiness of our
customers and our receivables collection experience. As a result
of some of these factors, the amount available to us under the
program has decreased. Although we do not believe that any of
these covenants or other restrictive provisions presently
materially restricts our liquidity position, a breach of one or
more of the covenants or an event that triggers other
restrictive provisions could result in material adverse
consequences that could negatively impact our business,
consolidated results of operations and financial position. This
in turn could result in a further decline in amounts available
under the accounts receivable securitization program or
termination of the program. Such adverse consequences may
include the acceleration of amounts outstanding under certain of
the facilities, triggering the obligation to redeem certain debt
securities, termination of existing unused commitments by our
lenders or the bank commitment related to our accounts
receivable securitization program, refusal by lenders to extend
further credit under one or more of the facilities or to enter
into new facilities, or the lowering or modification of our
credit ratings.
Strengthening
of the U.S. dollar and other foreign currency exchange rate
fluctuations could materially impact our consolidated financial
position and results of operations.
During 2010, approximately 54% of our sales originated outside
the United States. We translate sales and other results
denominated in foreign currency into U.S. dollars for our
consolidated financial statements. During periods of a
strengthening U.S. dollar, our reported international sales
and net earnings could be reduced because foreign currencies may
translate into fewer U.S. dollars.
Also, while we often produce in the same geographic markets as
our products are sold, expenses are more concentrated in the
United States compared with sales, so that in a time of
strengthening of the U.S. dollar, our profit margins could
be reduced. While we use financial instruments to hedge certain
foreign currency exposures, this does not insulate us completely
from foreign currency effects.
We have recognized foreign exchange gains and losses related to
the currency devaluations in Venezuela and its designation as a
highly inflationary economy under generally accepted accounting
principles in the United States of America, or
U.S. GAAP, effective January 1, 2010. See
Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk, of
Item 7A, Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures
About Market Risk, for further discussion.
14
We may use financial instruments from time to time to manage
exposure to foreign exchange rate fluctuations, which exposes us
to counterparty credit risk for nonperformance. See
Note 12, Derivatives and Hedging Activities,
for further discussion, which is contained in Part II,
Item 8 of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
The
full realization of our deferred tax assets, including primarily
those related to the Settlement agreement may be affected by a
number of factors.
We have deferred tax assets related to the Settlement agreement,
other accruals not yet deductible for tax purposes, foreign net
operating loss carry forwards and investment tax allowances,
employee benefit items, and other items. We have established
valuation allowances to reduce those deferred tax assets to an
amount that is more likely than not to be realized. Our ability
to utilize these deferred tax assets depends in part upon our
future operating results. We expect to realize these assets over
an extended period. Consequently, changes in tax laws could
cause actual results to differ from projections.
Our largest deferred tax asset relates to our Settlement
agreement. The value of this asset, which was $368 million
at December 31, 2010, may be affected by our tax situation
at the time of the payment under the Settlement agreement as
well as by the value of our common stock at that time. The
deferred tax asset reflects the fair market value of
18 million shares of our common stock at a post-split price
of $17.86 per share based on the price when the Settlement
agreement was reached in 2002. See Note 15, Income
Taxes, for further discussion.
Our
annual effective income tax rate can materially change as a
result of changes in our U.S. and foreign mix of earnings and
other factors including changes in tax laws and changes by
regulatory authorities.
Our overall effective income tax rate is equal to our total tax
expense as a percentage of total earnings before tax. However,
income tax expense and benefits are not recognized on a global
basis but rather on a jurisdictional or legal entity basis.
Changes in statutory tax rates and laws, as well as ongoing
audits by domestic and international authorities, could affect
the amount of income taxes and other taxes paid by us. For
example, legislative proposals to change U.S. taxation of
non-U.S. earnings
could increase our effective tax rate. Also, changes in the mix
of earnings between jurisdictions and assumptions used in the
calculation of income taxes, among other factors, could have a
significant effect on our overall effective income tax rate.
We
experience competition in our operating segments and in the
geographic areas in which we operate.
Our products compete with similar products made by other
manufacturers and with a number of other types of materials or
products. We compete on the basis of performance characteristics
of our products, as well as service, price and innovations in
technology. A number of competing domestic and foreign companies
are well-established. Our inability to maintain a competitive
advantage could result in lower prices or lower sales volumes,
which would have a negative impact on our consolidated financial
position and results of operations.
A
slowing pipeline of new technologies and solutions at favorable
margins could adversely affect our performance and prospects for
future growth.
Our competitive advantage is due in part to our ability to
develop and introduce new products in a timely manner at
favorable margins. The development and introduction cycle of new
products can be lengthy and involve high levels of investment.
New products may not meet sales expectations or margin
expectations due to many factors, including our inability to:
(i) accurately predict demand, end-user preferences and
evolving industry standards; (ii) resolve technical and
technological challenges in a timely and cost-effective manner;
or (iii) achieve manufacturing efficiencies.
A
major loss of or disruption in our manufacturing and
distribution operations or our information systems and
telecommunication resources could adversely affect our
business.
If we experienced a natural disaster, such as a tornado,
hurricane, earthquake or other severe weather event, or a
casualty loss from an event such as a fire or flood, at one of
our larger strategic facilities or if such event affected a key
supplier, our supply chain, or our information systems and
telecommunication resources, then there could be a material
adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations.
15
The
price of our common stock has on occasion experienced
significant price and volume fluctuations. The sale of
substantial amounts of our common stock could adversely affect
the price of the common stock. One stockholder has beneficial
ownership of approximately 32% of our common
shares.
The market price of our common stock has experienced and may
continue to experience significant price and volume fluctuations
greater than those experienced by the broader stock market. In
addition, our announcements of our quarterly net earnings,
future developments relating to the W. R. Grace & Co.
bankruptcy, litigation, the effects of animal and food-related
health issues, spikes in raw material and energy related costs,
changes in general conditions in the economy or the financial
markets and other developments affecting us, our customers,
suppliers and competitors are among the events that could cause
the market price of our common stock to fluctuate substantially.
The sale or the availability for sale of a large number of
shares of our common stock in the public market could adversely
affect the price of the common stock. The Settlement agreement
discussed above provides for the issuance of 18 million
shares of our common stock. If this amount of common stock were
to be sold in a relatively short period of trading, the sale
could adversely affect the price of our common stock. See
Note 16, Commitments and Contingencies, under
the caption Cryovac Transaction Commitments and
Contingencies for further discussion.
According to a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on
February 14, 2011, Davis Selected Advisers, L.P. reported
beneficial ownership of 51,458,302 shares, or approximately
32%, of the outstanding shares of our common stock. As such,
Davis Selected Advisers has a significant voting block with
respect to matters submitted to a stockholder vote, including
the election of directors and the approval of potential business
combination transactions.
While the Schedule 13G/A filed by Davis Selected Advisers, L.P.
indicates that the beneficially owned shares of our common stock
were not acquired for the purpose of changing or influencing the
control of the Company, if this stockholder were to change its
purpose for holding our common stock from investment to
attempting to change or influence our management, this
concentration of our common stock could potentially affect us
and the price of our common stock.
Weakness
in the financial and credit markets and other factors could
potentially lead to the impairment of the carrying amount of our
goodwill and other long-lived assets.
We have seven reporting units that are included in our segment
reporting structure. The six reporting units with goodwill
balances allocated to them are Food Packaging, Food Solutions,
Protective Packaging, Shrink Packaging, Specialty Materials and
Medical Applications.
We test goodwill for impairment on a reporting unit basis
annually during the fourth quarter of each year and at other
times if events or circumstances exist that indicate the
carrying value of goodwill may no longer be recoverable. During
2010, we determined that there were no events or changes in
circumstances that occurred that would indicate that the fair
value of any of our reporting units may be below its carrying
value.
Although we determined in 2010 that there were no events or
changes in circumstances that occurred that would indicate that
the fair value of any of our reporting units may be below its
carrying value, the future occurrence of a potential indicator
of impairment, such as: (i) a decrease in our expected net
earnings; (ii) adverse equity market conditions;
(iii) a decline in current market multiples; (iv) a
decline in our common stock price; (v) a significant
adverse change in legal factors or business climates;
(vi) an adverse action or assessment by a regulator;
(vii) heightened competition; (viii) strategic
decisions made in response to economic or competitive
conditions; or (ix) a more-likely-than-not expectation that
a reporting unit or a significant portion of a reporting unit
will be sold or disposed of, could require an interim assessment
for some or all of the reporting units before the next required
annual assessment. In the event of significant adverse changes
of the nature described above, we might have to recognize a
non-cash impairment of goodwill, which could have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and
results of operations.
16
Product
liability claims or regulatory actions could adversely affect
our financial results or harm our reputation or the value of our
brands.
Claims for losses or injuries purportedly caused by some of our
products arise in the ordinary course of our business. In
addition to the risk of substantial monetary judgments, product
liability claims or regulatory actions could result in negative
publicity that could harm our reputation in the marketplace or
adversely impact the value of our brands or our ability to sell
our products in certain jurisdictions. We could also be required
to recall possibly defective products, which could result in
adverse publicity and significant expenses. Although we maintain
product liability insurance coverage, potential product
liability claims could be excluded or exceed coverage limits
under the terms of our insurance policies or could result in
increased costs for such coverage.
Our
subsidiaries hold substantially all of our assets and conduct
substantially all of our operations, and as a result we rely on
distributions or advances from our subsidiaries.
We conduct substantially all of our business through two direct
wholly-owned subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air
Corporation (US). These two subsidiaries, directly and
indirectly, own substantially all of the assets of our business
and conduct operations themselves and through other subsidiaries
around the globe. Therefore, we depend on distributions or
advances from our subsidiaries to meet our debt service and
other obligations and to pay dividends with respect to shares of
our common stock. Contractual provisions, laws or regulations to
which we or any of our subsidiaries may become subject, tax
inefficiencies and the financial condition and operating
requirements of subsidiaries may reduce funds available for
service of our indebtedness, dividends, and general corporate
purposes.
Cautionary
Notice Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
The SEC encourages companies to disclose forward-looking
statements so that investors can better understand a
companys future prospects and make informed investment
decisions. Some of our statements in this report, in documents
incorporated by reference into this report and in our future
oral and written statements, may be forward-looking. These
statements reflect our beliefs and expectations as to future
events and trends affecting our business, our consolidated
financial position and our results of operations. These
forward-looking statements are based upon our current
expectations concerning future events and discuss, among other
things, anticipated future financial performance and future
business plans. Forward-looking statements are identified by
such words and phrases as anticipates,
assumes, believes, could be,
estimates, expects, intends,
may, plans to, will and
similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are necessarily
subject to risks and uncertainties, many of which are outside
our control, that could cause actual results to differ
materially from these statements.
Except as required by the federal securities laws, we undertake
no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement,
whether as a result of new information, future events or
otherwise.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
17
We manufacture products in 114 facilities, with 44 of those
facilities serving more than one of our business segments and
our Other category of products. The geographic dispersion of our
manufacturing facilities is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing
|
|
Geographic Region
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
50
|
|
Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA)
|
|
|
33
|
|
Latin America
|
|
|
11
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing
Facilities by Reportable Segment and Other
Food Packaging: We produce Food Packaging
products in 38 manufacturing facilities, of which 13 are in
North America, 10 in the EMEA region, 7 in Latin America, and 8
in the Asia-Pacific region.
Food Solutions: We produce Food Solutions
products in 38 manufacturing facilities, of which 13 are in
North America, 13 in the EMEA region, 7 in Latin America, and 5
in the
Asia-Pacific
region.
Protective Packaging: We produce Protective
Packaging products in 78 manufacturing facilities, of which 35
are in North America, 23 in the EMEA region, 9 in Latin America,
and 11 in the Asia-Pacific region.
Other Products: We produce Other products in
25 manufacturing facilities, of which 10 are in North America,
12 in the EMEA region, 2 in Latin America, and 1 in the
Asia-Pacific region.
Other
Property Information
We own the large majority of our manufacturing facilities. Some
of these facilities are subject to secured or other financing
arrangements. We lease the balance of our manufacturing
facilities, which are generally smaller sites. Our manufacturing
facilities are usually located in general purpose buildings that
house our specialized machinery for the manufacture of one or
more products. Because of the relatively low density of our air
cellular, polyethylene foam and protective mailer products, we
realize significant freight savings by locating our
manufacturing facilities for these products near our customers
and distributors.
We also occupy facilities containing sales, distribution,
technical, warehouse or administrative functions at a number of
locations in the United States and in many foreign countries.
Some of these facilities are located on the manufacturing sites
that we own and some on those that we lease. Stand-alone
facilities of these types are generally leased. Our global
headquarters are located in a leased property in Elmwood Park,
New Jersey. For a list of those countries outside of the United
States where we have operations, see Foreign
Operations above. Our website, www.sealedair.com,
contains additional information about our worldwide business.
We believe that our manufacturing, warehouse, office and other
facilities are well maintained, suitable for their purposes and
adequate for our needs.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
The information set forth in Part II, Item 8 of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
in Note 16, Commitments and Contingencies,
under the caption Cryovac Transaction Commitments and
Contingencies is incorporated herein by reference.
At December 31, 2010, we were a party to, or otherwise
involved in, several federal, state and foreign environmental
proceedings and private environmental claims for the cleanup of
Superfund sites under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
and other sites. We may have potential liability for
investigation and cleanup of some of these sites. It is our
policy to accrue for environmental
18
cleanup costs if it is probable that a liability has been
incurred and if we can reasonably estimate an amount or range of
costs associated with various alternative remediation
strategies, without giving effect to any possible future
insurance proceeds. As assessments and cleanups proceed, we
review these liabilities periodically and adjust our reserves as
additional information becomes available. At December 31,
2010, environmental related reserves were not material to our
consolidated financial position or results of operations. While
it is often difficult to estimate potential liabilities and the
future impact of environmental matters, based upon the
information currently available to us and our experience in
dealing with these matters, we believe that our potential future
liability with respect to these sites is not material to our
consolidated financial position and results of operations.
We are also involved in various other legal actions incidental
to our business. We believe, after consulting with counsel, that
the disposition of these other legal proceedings and matters
will not have a material effect on our consolidated financial
position and results of operations.
|
|
Item 4.
|
(Removed
and Reserved).
|
Executive
Officers of the Registrant
The information appearing in the table below sets forth the
current position or positions held by each of our executive
officers, the officers age as of January 31, 2011,
the year in which the officer was first elected to the position
currently held with us or with the former Sealed Air
Corporation, now known as Sealed Air Corporation (US) and a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, and the year in which
such person was first elected an officer (as indicated in the
footnote to the table).
All of our officers serve at the pleasure of the Board of
Directors. We have employed all officers for more than five
years except for Dr. Savoca, who was first elected an
officer effective July 23, 2008, and Mr. Chammas, who
was first elected an officer effective December 16, 2010.
Before joining us in July 2008, Dr. Savoca was Vice
President, Technology, of the Specialty Polymers Group of Akzo
Nobel, a manufacturer of paints, coatings and specialty
chemicals from January 2008 through May 2008, and prior to that
was Vice President, Technology, of National Starch and Chemical
Company, a manufacturer of specialty chemicals and starches for
use in industrial and commercial applications from January 2003
through December 2007. In January 2008, Akzo Nobel acquired
National Starch and Chemical Company.
Before joining us in November 2010, Mr. Chammas was the
Vice President, Worldwide Supply Chain, for the Wm. Wrigley Jr.
Company, a confectionery company, from October 2008 through
October 2010, and prior to that served in management positions
of increasing responsibility in supply chain, operations and
procurement with the Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company from January 2002
until October 2008.
There are no family relationships among any of our officers or
directors.
Executive
Officers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Age as of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 31,
|
|
First Elected to
|
|
First Elected
|
Name and Current Position
|
|
2011
|
|
Current Position*
|
|
an Officer*
|
|
William V. Hickey
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
2000
|
|
|
|
1980
|
|
President, Chief Executive
Officer and Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David H. Kelsey
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Emile Z. Chammas
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
Senior Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan B. Baker
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
1994
|
|
|
|
1994
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Age as of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 31,
|
|
First Elected to
|
|
First Elected
|
Name and Current Position
|
|
2011
|
|
Current Position*
|
|
an Officer*
|
|
Mary A. Coventry
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
1994
|
|
|
|
1994
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Karl R. Deily
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jean-Marie Deméautis
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Ryan Flanagan
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warren J. Kudman
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James P. Mix
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
1994
|
|
|
|
1994
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manuel Mondragón
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Larry Pillote
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ruth Roper
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh L. Sargant
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ann C. Savoca
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Katherine White
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
1996
|
|
Vice President, General
Counsel and Secretary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher C. Woodbridge
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Vice President
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tod S. Christie
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
1999
|
|
Treasurer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey S. Warren
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
1996
|
|
|
|
1996
|
|
Controller
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
All persons listed in the table who were first elected officers
before 1998 were executive officers of the former Sealed Air
Corporation, now known as Sealed Air Corporation (US), prior to
the Cryovac transaction in March 1998. Mr. Hickey was first
elected President in 1996, first elected Chief Executive Officer
in 2000 and first elected a director in 1999. Mr. Kelsey
was first elected Senior Vice President in 2003 and first
elected Chief Financial Officer in 2002. Ms. White was
first elected Vice President in 2003, first elected General
Counsel in 1998, and first elected Secretary in 1996. |
20
Part II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Market
Information
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under
the trading symbol SEE. The table below shows the quarterly high
and low closing sales prices of our common stock and cash
dividends per share for 2010 and 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
22.02
|
|
|
$
|
18.84
|
|
|
$
|
0.12
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
23.26
|
|
|
|
19.72
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
22.96
|
|
|
|
19.49
|
|
|
|
0.13
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
25.59
|
|
|
|
22.25
|
|
|
|
0.13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
15.70
|
|
|
$
|
10.43
|
|
|
$
|
0.12
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
21.24
|
|
|
|
14.12
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
21.62
|
|
|
|
17.93
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
22.65
|
|
|
|
18.78
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
|
As of January 31, 2011, there were approximately 6,200
holders of record of our common stock.
Dividends
Currently there are no restrictions that materially limit our
ability to pay dividends or that we reasonably believe are
likely to materially limit the future payment of dividends on
our common stock.
The following table shows our total cash dividends paid each
year since we initiated quarterly cash dividend payments in 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash
|
|
|
|
Total Cash
|
|
|
Dividends Paid per
|
|
|
|
Dividends Paid
|
|
|
Common Share
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$
|
48.6
|
|
|
$
|
0.30
|
|
2007
|
|
|
64.6
|
|
|
|
0.40
|
|
2008
|
|
|
76.4
|
|
|
|
0.48
|
|
2009
|
|
|
75.7
|
|
|
|
0.48
|
|
2010
|
|
|
79.7
|
|
|
|
0.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
345.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On February 17, 2011, our Board of Directors declared a
quarterly cash dividend of $0.13 per common share payable on
March 18, 2011 to stockholders of record at the close of
business on March 4, 2011. The estimated amount of this
dividend payment is $21 million based on 159 million
shares of our common stock issued and outstanding as of
January 31, 2011.
The dividend payments discussed above are recorded as reductions
to cash and cash equivalents and retained earnings on our
consolidated balance sheets. From time to time, we may consider
other means of returning value to our stockholders based on our
consolidated financial position and results of operations. There
is no guarantee that our Board of Directors will declare any
further dividends.
21
Common
Stock Performance Comparisons
The following graph shows, for the five years ended
December 31, 2010, the cumulative total return on an
investment of $100 assumed to have been made on
December 31, 2005 in our common stock. The graph compares
this return (SEE) with that of comparable
investments assumed to have been made on the same date in:
(a) the Standard & Poors 500 Stock Index
(Composite S&P 500); (b) a prior
self-constructed peer group (Peer Group 1) and
(c) an updated self-constructed peer group (Peer
Group 2).
The prior Peer Group 1 includes us and the following other
companies: Aptar Group Inc.; Avery Dennison Corporation; Ball
Corporation; Bemis Company, Inc.; Crown Holdings, Inc.;
MeadWestvaco Corporation; Pactiv Corporation (for 2005 through
2009); Rexam PLC; Silgan Holdings Inc.; Sonoco Products Co.; and
Spartech Corporation.
In 2010, we revised our peer group and designated it Peer Group
2, which will replace Peer Group 1 beginning January 1,
2011. We decided to utilize Peer Group 2 rather than Peer Group
1 because we believe that Peer Group 2 more closely represents
public companies in packaging and related industries that are
comparable to us based on sales, total assets, numbers of
employees and market capitalization. Further, the Organization
and Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors, or
Compensation Committee, will use this peer group to benchmark
executive compensation going forward.
The updated Peer Group 2 includes us and the following
companies: Avery Dennison Corporation; Ball Corporation; Bemis
Company, Inc.; Crown Holdings, Inc.; Greif, Inc.; MeadWestvaco
Corporation; Owens-Illinois, Inc.; Packaging Corporation of
America; Pactiv Corporation (for 2005 through 2009); Rock-Tenn
Company; Rockwood Holdings Inc.; Silgan Holdings Inc.; Sonoco
Products Co.; and Temple-Inland, Inc.
Pactiv Corporation is included in both peer groups only in the
periods 2005 through 2009. Pactiv was acquired on
November 16, 2010 and concurrently delisted as a public
company.
Total return for each assumed investment assumes the
reinvestment of all dividends on December 31 of the year in
which the dividends were paid.
5-Year
Compound Annual Growth
Rate
SEE: (0.0%)
Composite S&P 500: (+2.3%)
Peer Group 1: (+2.3%)
Peer Group 2: (+4.5%)
22
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
The table below sets forth the total number of shares of our
common stock, par value $0.10 per share, that we repurchased in
each month of the quarter ended December 31, 2010. The
maximum number of shares that may yet be purchased under our
plans or programs is set forth below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of
|
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Shares Purchased
|
|
|
that May Yet Be
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
as Part of Publicly
|
|
|
Purchased Under
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Paid per
|
|
|
Announced Plans or
|
|
|
the Plans or
|
|
|
|
Purchased(1)
|
|
|
Share(1)
|
|
|
Programs(1)
|
|
|
Programs(1)
|
|
Period
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
(d)
|
|
|
Balance as of September 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,975,600
|
|
October 1, 2010 through October 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,975,600
|
|
November 1, 2010 through November 30, 2010
|
|
|
428,158
|
|
|
|
22.91
|
|
|
|
428,158
|
|
|
|
15,547,442
|
|
December 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010
|
|
|
1,300
|
|
|
|
23.52
|
|
|
|
1,300
|
|
|
|
15,546,142
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
429,458
|
|
|
$
|
22.91
|
|
|
|
429,458
|
|
|
|
15,546,142
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
On August 9, 2007, we announced that our Board of Directors
had approved a share repurchase program authorizing us to
repurchase in the aggregate up to 20 million shares of our
issued and outstanding common stock (described further under the
caption, Repurchases of Capital Stock, in
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations in Part II,
Item 7 of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K).
This program has no set expiration date. This program replaced
our prior share repurchase program, which we terminated at that
time. We purchased all shares during the quarter ended
December 31, 2010 pursuant to our share repurchase program.
We report price calculations in column (b) in the table
above including commissions. |
We do, from time to time, acquire shares of common stock that
are (a) withheld from awards under our 2005 contingent
stock plan pursuant to the provision of that plan that permits
tax withholding obligations or other legally required charges to
be satisfied by having us withhold shares from an award under
that plan, or (b) forfeited under that plan upon failure to
satisfy vesting conditions, for which no consideration is paid.
These acquisitions are not included in the table above.
23
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per common share data)
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
4,490.1
|
|
|
$
|
4,242.8
|
|
|
$
|
4,843.5
|
|
|
$
|
4,651.2
|
|
|
$
|
4,327.9
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
1,252.8
|
|
|
|
1,218.5
|
|
|
|
1,236.6
|
|
|
|
1,301.1
|
|
|
|
1,240.1
|
|
Operating profit
|
|
|
535.0
|
|
|
|
492.3
|
|
|
|
396.5
|
|
|
|
549.3
|
|
|
|
526.1
|
|
Earnings before income tax provision
|
|
|
343.4
|
|
|
|
329.9
|
|
|
|
222.3
|
|
|
|
456.0
|
|
|
|
400.1
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
255.9
|
|
|
|
244.3
|
|
|
|
179.9
|
|
|
|
353.0
|
|
|
|
274.1
|
|
Basic and diluted net earnings per common share(2):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
|
$
|
1.54
|
|
|
$
|
1.13
|
|
|
$
|
2.19
|
|
|
$
|
1.69
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
1.44
|
|
|
$
|
1.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.99
|
|
|
$
|
1.88
|
|
|
$
|
1.46
|
|
Common stock dividends
|
|
$
|
80.9
|
|
|
$
|
77.5
|
|
|
$
|
76.4
|
|
|
$
|
64.6
|
|
|
$
|
48.6
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
675.6
|
|
|
$
|
694.5
|
|
|
$
|
128.9
|
|
|
$
|
430.3
|
|
|
$
|
373.1
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
1,945.9
|
|
|
|
1,948.7
|
|
|
|
1,938.1
|
|
|
|
1,969.7
|
|
|
|
1,957.1
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
5,399.4
|
|
|
|
5,420.1
|
|
|
|
4,986.0
|
|
|
|
5,438.3
|
|
|
|
5,020.9
|
|
Settlement agreement and related accrued interest
|
|
|
787.9
|
|
|
|
746.8
|
|
|
|
707.8
|
|
|
|
670.9
|
|
|
|
636.0
|
|
Long-term debt, less current portion(3)
|
|
|
1,399.2
|
|
|
|
1,626.3
|
|
|
|
1,289.9
|
|
|
|
1,531.6
|
|
|
|
1,826.6
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
2,401.6
|
|
|
|
2,200.3
|
|
|
|
1,925.6
|
|
|
|
2,025.5
|
|
|
|
1,660.7
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
592.3
|
|
|
|
639.6
|
|
|
|
50.5
|
|
|
|
194.5
|
|
|
|
350.6
|
|
Consolidated Cash Flows Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$
|
483.1
|
|
|
$
|
552.0
|
|
|
$
|
404.4
|
|
|
$
|
378.1
|
|
|
$
|
432.9
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(96.9
|
)
|
|
|
(70.3
|
)
|
|
|
(176.7
|
)
|
|
|
(274.1
|
)
|
|
|
(202.5
|
)
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
|
(373.0
|
)
|
|
|
90.3
|
|
|
|
(562.9
|
)
|
|
|
(59.5
|
)
|
|
|
(350.0
|
)
|
Other Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization(4)
|
|
$
|
154.7
|
|
|
$
|
154.5
|
|
|
$
|
155.0
|
|
|
$
|
150.4
|
|
|
$
|
154.1
|
|
Share-based incentive compensation(4)
|
|
|
30.6
|
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
13.9
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
87.6
|
|
|
|
80.3
|
|
|
|
180.7
|
|
|
|
210.8
|
|
|
|
167.9
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
See Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, for a
discussion of the factors that contributed to our consolidated
operating results for the three years ended December 31,
2010. |
|
(2) |
|
In February 2007, our Board of Directors declared a
two-for-one
stock split effected in the form of a stock dividend. All per
share data has been restated to reflect the
two-for-one
stock split. See Note 18, Net Earnings Per Common
Share, for the calculation of basic and diluted net
earnings per common share. All calculations have been adjusted
to reflect this adoption, and this change did not have a
material impact. |
|
(3) |
|
See Note 11, Debt and Credit Facilities, for a
discussion of our outstanding debt and available lines of credit. |
|
(4) |
|
The depreciation and amortization amounts for 2006 through 2008
have been adjusted to exclude share-based incentive compensation
expense to conform to the 2009 and 2010 presentation.
Share-based incentive compensation expense is included in
marketing, administrative and development expenses on our
consolidated statements of operations for all periods. |
24
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The information in Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(MD&A) should be read together with our
consolidated financial statements and related notes set forth in
Part II, Item 8, as well as the discussion included in
Part I, Item 1A, Risk Factors, of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
All amounts and percentages are approximate due to rounding and
all dollars are in millions, except per share amounts.
Non-U.S.
GAAP Information
In our MD&A, we present financial information in accordance
with U.S. GAAP, but we also present financial measures that
do not conform to U.S. GAAP, which we refer to as
non-U.S. GAAP.
As discussed below, we provide this supplemental information as
our management believes it is useful to investors. Investors
should use caution, however, when reviewing our
non-U.S. GAAP
presentations. The
non-U.S. GAAP
information is not a substitute for U.S. GAAP information.
It does not purport to represent the similarly titled
U.S. GAAP information and is not an indicator of our
performance under U.S. GAAP. Further,
non-U.S. GAAP
financial measures that we present may not be comparable with
similarly titled measures used by others.
In our 2011 Outlook below, we present anticipated
full year 2011 diluted net earnings per common share on a
U.S. GAAP basis, but we also note that we will exclude any
non-operating gains or losses that may be recognized in 2011
related to currency fluctuations in Venezuela. We believe these
gains or losses are attributable to the significant foreign
exchange fluctuations in that country and are not indicative of
a normal operating environment. We will exclude future foreign
exchange and other non-operating gains and or losses from our
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings per common share relating to our
Venezuelan subsidiary until such time that we believe the
foreign exchange environment in Venezuela stabilizes. We believe
that excluding these items from our U.S. GAAP reported and
projected net earnings performance will aid in the comparison of
our adjusted net earnings performance between 2011 and prior
years.
We also present adjusted diluted net earnings per common share
in our Highlights of Financial Performance below,
for the three years ended December 31, 2010. Our management
will look at our earnings performance both on an U.S. GAAP
basis and on a
non-U.S. GAAP
basis. Our
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings performance excludes unusual items
that are evaluated on an individual basis. Our evaluation of
whether to exclude an item for purposes of determining our
non-U.S. GAAP
net earnings performance considers both the quantitative and
qualitative aspects of the item, including, among other things
(i) its size and nature, (ii) whether or not it
relates to our ongoing business operations, and
(iii) whether or not we expect it to occur as part of our
normal business on a regular basis. For purposes of determining
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings performance, restructuring and
other charges and their related tax effect are excluded.
Further, the items excluded from
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted basis may also be excluded from the calculations of our
performance measures set by the Compensation Committee for
purposes of determining incentive compensation. Thus, our
management believes that this information may be useful to
investors.
In our Highlights of Financial Performance,
Net Sales by Segment Reporting Structure, Net
Sales by Geographic Region and elsewhere below, we first
present our results in accordance with U.S. GAAP and also
present a
non-U.S. GAAP
financial measure, adjusted diluted net earnings per
common share. Also, in some of the discussions and tables
that follow, we exclude the impact of foreign currency
translation when presenting net sales information, which we
define as constant dollar. Changes in net sales
excluding the impact of foreign currency translation are
non-U.S. GAAP
financial measures. As a worldwide business, it is important
that we take into account the effects of foreign currency
translation when we view our results and plan our strategies.
Nonetheless, we cannot directly control changes in foreign
currency exchange rates. Consequently, when our management looks
at net sales to measure the performance of our business, we
typically exclude the impact of foreign currency translation
from net sales. We also may exclude the impact of foreign
currency translation when making incentive compensation
determinations. As a result, our management believes that these
presentations may be useful to investors.
25
Overview
Beginning with the invention of Bubble
Wrap®
brand cushioning over fifty years ago, we have been a leading
global innovator and manufacturer of a wide range of packaging
and performance-based materials and equipment systems that serve
an array of food, industrial, medical and consumer applications.
At December 31, 2010, we employed approximately 2,300
sales, marketing and customer service personnel throughout the
world who sell and market our products through a large number of
distributors, fabricators and converters, as well as directly to
end-users such as food processors, foodservice businesses,
supermarket retailers and manufacturers. We have no material
long-term contracts for the distribution of our products. In
2010, no customer or affiliated group of customers accounted for
10% or more of our consolidated net sales.
Historically, net sales in our food businesses have tended to be
slightly lower in the first quarter and slightly higher towards
the end of the third quarter through the fourth quarter, due to
holiday events. Our Protective Packaging segment has also tended
to be slightly lower in the first quarter and higher during the
back-to-school
season in the mid-third quarter and through the fourth quarter
due to the holiday shopping season.
Competition for most of our packaging products is based
primarily on packaging performance characteristics, service and
price. Competition is also based upon innovations in packaging
technology and, as a result, we maintain ongoing research and
development programs to enable us to maintain technological
leadership. For more details, see Competition
included in Business, of Item 1, Part I.
Our net sales are sensitive to developments in our
customers business or market conditions, changes in the
global economy, and the effects of foreign currency translation.
Our costs can vary materially with changes in input costs,
including petrochemical-related costs (primarily resin costs),
which are not within our control. Consequently, our management
focuses on reducing those costs that we can control and using
petrochemical-based raw materials as efficiently as possible. We
also believe that our global presence helps to insulate us from
localized changes in business conditions.
We manage our businesses to generate substantial operating cash
flow. We believe that our operating cash flow will permit us to
continue to spend on innovative research and development and to
invest in our business by means of capital expenditures for
property and equipment and acquisitions. Moreover, our ability
to generate substantial operating cash flow should provide us
with the flexibility to modify our capital structure as the need
or opportunity arises and return capital to our stockholders.
2011
Outlook
In 2011, we are anticipating an ongoing modest rate of economic
recovery and an average constant dollar sales growth rate in the
5% to 7% range. Presently, our full year 2011 guidance also
assumes:
|
|
|
|
|
a low-to-mid
single-digit percent average increase in our resin costs
compared to our 2010 average cost;
|
|
|
|
a slightly unfavorable impact on net sales from foreign currency
translation;
|
|
|
|
depreciation and amortization expense for property and equipment
of $145 million;
|
|
|
|
amortization of share-based incentive compensation expense of
$30 million;
|
|
|
|
interest expense of $150 million, including
$43 million of accrued interest on the cash portion of our
payment under the Settlement agreement; and
|
|
|
|
an effective income tax rate of 27%.
|
As a result, we anticipate our full year 2011 diluted net
earnings guidance to be in the range of $1.75 to $1.90.
Our guidance excludes the payment under the Settlement
agreement, as the exact timing of the settlement payment is
unknown, although it is possible that payment could occur in the
first half of 2011. Payment of the Settlement agreement is
expected to be accretive to our net earnings by approximately
$0.12 to $0.14 per diluted share annually following the payment
date. This impact assumes using a substantial portion of
available cash to fund the payment and ceasing to accrue
interest on the settlement liability. See Settlement
Agreement and Related
26
Costs, of Material Commitments and
Contingencies below, for further discussion. Additionally,
our guidance excludes any non-operating gains or losses that may
be recognized in 2011 due to currency fluctuations in Venezuela.
In addition, capital expenditures in 2011 are estimated to be
$150 to $175 million.
Significant
2010 Events
Quarterly
Cash Dividends
In July 2010, our Board of Directors increased the quarterly
dividend by 8% to $0.13 per common share from $0.12 per common
share. We used cash of $80 million to pay quarterly
dividends in 2010. During 2009, we paid quarterly cash dividends
of $0.12 per common share using $76 million of available
cash.
On February 17, 2011, our Board of Directors declared a
quarterly cash dividend of $0.13 per common share payable on
March 18, 2011 to stockholders of record at the close of
business on March 4, 2011. The estimated amount of this
dividend payment is $21 million based on 159 million
shares of our common stock issued and outstanding as of
January 31, 2011.
Early
Redemption of Debt
In December 2010, we completed an early redemption of
$150 million of our outstanding $300 million principal
amount of our 12% Senior Notes due 2014. We redeemed the
notes at 127% of the principal amount plus accrued interest. The
aggregate redemption price was $196 million, which was
funded with available cash. Because of the redemption, we
recognized a pre-tax loss of $39 million. See Loss on
Debt Redemption below for further discussion.
Completion
of Global Manufacturing Strategy
In 2010, we recognized approximately $8 million of
restructuring and other associated charges related to our GMS
program, which marked the completion of this program. As a
result of the program, we have repositioned our supply chain
platform for more profitable growth in developing regions while
concurrently realigning our core manufacturing sites to improve
operating efficiency and realizing an annual $55 million
benefit run rate.
Common
Stock Repurchases
In the fourth quarter of 2010, we repurchased 0.4 million
shares of our common stock using approximately $10 million
of available cash.
27
Highlights
of Financial Performance
Below are the highlights of our financial performance for the
three years ended December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 vs. 2009
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
4,490.1
|
|
|
$
|
4,242.8
|
|
|
$
|
4,843.5
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
(12
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
$
|
1,252.8
|
|
|
$
|
1,218.5
|
|
|
$
|
1,236.6
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
|
(1
|
)%
|
% of total net sales
|
|
|
27.9
|
%
|
|
|
28.7
|
%
|
|
|
25.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing, administrative and development expenses
|
|
|
710.2
|
|
|
|
719.2
|
|
|
|
755.0
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
% of total net sales
|
|
|
15.8
|
%
|
|
|
17.0
|
%
|
|
|
15.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring and other charges
|
|
|
7.6
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
85.1
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(92
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating profit
|
|
$
|
535.0
|
|
|
$
|
492.3
|
|
|
$
|
396.5
|
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of total net sales
|
|
|
11.9
|
%
|
|
|
11.6
|
%
|
|
|
8.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings available to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
255.9
|
|
|
$
|
244.3
|
|
|
$
|
179.9
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
|
$
|
1.54
|
|
|
$
|
1.13
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
1.44
|
|
|
$
|
1.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.99
|
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
158.3
|
|
|
|
157.2
|
|
|
|
157.6
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
176.7
|
|
|
|
182.6
|
|
|
|
188.6
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)%
|
|
|
(3
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As shown in the table above, our diluted net earnings per common
share increased 7% in 2010 compared with 2009. The primary
contributing factors to our diluted net earnings per common
share growth in 2010 compared with 2009 were:
|
|
|
|
|
higher gross profit of $34 million, which was largely
driven by volume growth in both our industrial and food
businesses, benefits realized from our supply chain productivity
improvements and from producing products in our new, low-cost
facilities in developing regions. These factors were partially
offset by higher average petrochemical-based raw material costs
of approximately $130 million;
|
|
|
|
lower marketing, administrative and development expenses of
$9 million, primarily due to lower incentive compensation
expenses as our financial results for 2010 did not meet some of
our goals; and
|
|
|
|
a decline in the weighted average number of diluted common
shares of 5.9 million in 2010 compared with 2009 primarily
due to the early redemption in July 2009 of our
3% Convertible Senior Notes due 2033.
|
These factors were partially offset by an increase in
non-operating items of $29 million, primarily due to the
loss on debt redemption of $39 million in 2010 compared
with $3 million in 2009.
On an adjusted basis, excluding the items detailed in
Diluted Net Earnings per Common Share below, our
diluted net earnings per common share increased 11% to $1.60 in
2010 from $1.44 in 2009. A reconciliation of U.S. GAAP
diluted net earnings per common share to
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings per common share is included in
Diluted Net Earnings per Common Share below.
See the discussions below for further details about the material
factors that contributed to the changes in our net earnings for
the three years ended December 31, 2010.
28
Net Sales
by Segment Reporting Structure
The following table presents net sales by our segment reporting
structure:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 vs. 2009
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Net sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Food Packaging
|
|
$
|
1,923.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,839.8
|
|
|
$
|
1,969.4
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
|
(7
|
)%
|
As a % of total net sales
|
|
|
43
|
%
|
|
|
43
|
%
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Food Solutions
|
|
|
934.9
|
|
|
|
891.7
|
|
|
|
988.3
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
As a % of total net sales
|
|
|
21
|
%
|
|
|
21
|
%
|
|
|
20
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Protective Packaging
|
|
|
1,299.4
|
|
|
|
1,192.9
|
|
|
|
1,480.3
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
As a % of total net sales
|
|
|
29
|
%
|
|
|
28
|
%
|
|
|
31
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
332.2
|
|
|
|
318.4
|
|
|
|
405.5
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
As a % of total net sales
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
4,490.1
|
|
|
$
|
4,242.8
|
|
|
$
|
4,843.5
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
(12
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Sales by Geographic Region
The following table presents our net sales by geographic region:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 vs. 2009
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Net sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
$
|
2,081.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,969.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,185.2
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
(10
|
)%
|
As a % of total net sales
|
|
|
46
|
%
|
|
|
46
|
%
|
|
|
45
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International
|
|
|
2,408.5
|
|
|
|
2,273.7
|
|
|
|
2,658.3
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
As a % of total net sales
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
55
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net sales
|
|
$
|
4,490.1
|
|
|
$
|
4,242.8
|
|
|
$
|
4,843.5
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
(12
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By geographic region, the components of the increase in net
sales for 2010 compared with 2009 were as follows:
2010
compared with 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
|
International
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
|
Volume Units
|
|
$
|
116.4
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
$
|
99.3
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
$
|
215.7
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
Volume Acquired businesses, net of dispositions
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Product price/mix
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(34.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69.9
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
69.9
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
112.6
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
$
|
134.7
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
$
|
247.3
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29
By geographic region, the components of the decrease in net
sales for 2009 compared with 2008 were as follows:
2009
compared with 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
|
International
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
|
Volume Units
|
|
$
|
(186.4
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(192.3
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(378.7
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)%
|
Volume Acquired businesses, net of dispositions
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Product price/mix
|
|
|
(32.0
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
53.2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
21.2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(242.0
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(242.0
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
(216.2
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(384.5
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(600.7
|
)
|
|
|
(12
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
Currency Translation Impact on Net Sales
As shown above, more than 50% of our consolidated net sales are
generated outside the U.S. Approximately 20% of our
consolidated net sales are euro-denominated. Since we are a
U.S. company, we translate our foreign currency denominated
net sales into U.S. dollars. Due to the strengthening and
weakening in foreign currencies relative to the
U.S. dollar, the translation of our net sales from foreign
currencies to U.S. dollars may result in a favorable or
unfavorable impact on our consolidated net sales.
In 2010, we experienced a favorable foreign currency translation
impact on net sales of $70 million compared with 2009 due
to the strengthening of most foreign currencies against the
U.S. dollar. This impact includes an unfavorable foreign
currency translation impact of $18 million in the second
half of 2010 as the U.S. dollar began to strengthen against
most foreign currencies.
In 2009, we experienced an unfavorable foreign currency
translation impact on net sales of $242 million compared
with 2008 due to the strengthening of the U.S. dollar
relative to most foreign currencies. This impact includes a
favorable foreign currency translation impact of
$49 million in the fourth quarter of 2009 as most foreign
currencies strengthened against the U.S. dollar.
Components
of Change in Net Sales
The following tables present the components of change in net
sales by our segment reporting structure for 2010 compared with
2009 and 2009 compared with 2008. We also present the change in
net sales excluding the impact of foreign currency translation,
a
non-U.S. GAAP
measure, which we define as constant dollar. We
believe using constant dollar measures aids in the comparability
between periods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Food
|
|
|
Food
|
|
|
Protective
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Compared with 2009
|
|
Packaging
|
|
|
Solutions
|
|
|
Packaging
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
|
Volume Units
|
|
$
|
64.1
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
$
|
25.5
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
$
|
107.5
|
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
$
|
18.6
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
$
|
215.7
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
Volume Acquired businesses, net of (dispositions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Product price/mix(1)
|
|
|
(30.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(9.9
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
49.9
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(3.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
69.9
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total change (U.S. GAAP)
|
|
$
|
83.8
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
$
|
43.2
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
$
|
106.5
|
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
$
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
$
|
247.3
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact of foreign currency translation
|
|
$
|
(49.9
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(12.8
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(10.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)%
|
|
$
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
$
|
(69.9
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total constant dollar change
(Non-U.S.
GAAP)
|
|
$
|
33.9
|
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
$
|
30.4
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
$
|
95.8
|
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
$
|
17.3
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
$
|
177.4
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Food
|
|
|
Food
|
|
|
Protective
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 Compared with 2008
|
|
Packaging
|
|
|
Solutions
|
|
|
Packaging
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
|
Volume Units
|
|
$
|
(55.4
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(35.4
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(209.4
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(78.5
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(378.7
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)%
|
Volume Acquired businesses, net of (dispositions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.4
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Product price/mix(1)
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30.6
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
21.2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
(120.4
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(57.5
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(49.6
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(14.5
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(242.0
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total change (U.S. GAAP)
|
|
$
|
(129.6
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(96.6
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(287.4
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(87.1
|
)
|
|
|
(22
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(600.7
|
)
|
|
|
(12
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact of foreign currency translation
|
|
$
|
120.4
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
$
|
57.5
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
$
|
49.6
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
$
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
$
|
242.0
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total constant dollar change
(Non-U.S.
GAAP)
|
|
$
|
(9.2
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(39.1
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(237.8
|
)
|
|
|
(16
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(72.6
|
)
|
|
|
(18
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(358.7
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Our product price/mix reported above includes the net impact of
our pricing actions as well as the
period-to-period
change in the mix of products sold. Also included in our
reported product price/mix is the net effect of some of our
customers purchasing our products in other countries at selling
prices denominated in U.S. dollars or euros. This primarily
arises when we export product from the U.S. and euro-zone
countries. The impact to our reported product price/mix of these
purchases in other countries at selling prices denominated in
U.S. dollars or euros was approximately $(17) million
unfavorable for 2010 compared with 2009 and approximately
$55 million favorable for 2009 compared with 2008. In 2010
and 2009, this effect was most pronounced in our Food Packaging
segment, in part due to the volatility in Venezuelan exchange
rates. |
The following net sales discussion is on a constant dollar basis.
Food
Packaging Segment Net Sales
2010
compared with 2009
The $34 million or 2% increase in net sales in 2010
compared with 2009 was primarily due to:
|
|
|
|
|
higher unit volumes in North America of $36 million, or 4%,
and in the Latin American region of $22 million, or 8%;
|
partially offset by:
|
|
|
|
|
unfavorable impacts of product price/mix in North America of
$12 million, or 1%, and in the Latin American region of
$9 million, or 3%.
|
The higher unit volumes in North America and in Latin America
were mostly due to an increase in our customers beef
production rates, resulting in higher demand for most of our
packaging formats.
The unfavorable impact of product price/mix in North America was
primarily due to selectively lower pricing associated with
higher customer volume commitments, which offset the benefits of
our price increases and formula contract adjustments in the
year. The unfavorable impact of product price/mix in the Latin
American region was primarily due to the volatility of the
Venezuelan currency as discussed above.
2009
compared with 2008
The $9 million or 1% decrease in net sales in 2009 compared
with 2008 was primarily due to:
|
|
|
|
|
decreases in unit volume in Europe of $24 million, or 5%,
and in the United States of $19 million, or 2%;
|
partially offset by:
|
|
|
|
|
favorable impacts of product price/mix in Latin America of
$31 million, or 11%.
|
31
The decrease in unit volume in Europe was primarily due to lower
equipment sales, which we believe was mostly the result of lower
capital spending by customers in this region. The decrease in
unit volume in the United States was primarily due to the
decline in local meat production mostly experienced during the
first nine months of 2009. The unit volume declines in Europe
and the United States reflected the continuing economic weakness
in these regions. The favorable impact of product price/mix in
Latin America was primarily due to the timing of pricing actions
on most Food Packaging products, in part to cover the weakness
of the Venezuelan currency.
Food
Solutions Segment Net Sales
2010
compared with 2009
The $30 million, or 4%, increase in net sales in 2010
compared with 2009 was primarily due to:
|
|
|
|
|
higher unit volumes in Europe of $11 million, or 3%, and
North America of $10 million, or 3%, mostly due to
increased demand for our ready meals packaging products and, to
a lesser extent, our vertical pouch packaging products; and
|
|
|
|
favorable product price/mix in North America of
$12 million, or 3%, from the benefits of both prior price
increases and contract adjustments.
|
These factors were partially offset by a decline in product
price/mix in Europe of $5 million, or 2%, primarily due to
the timing of price adjustments for changes in resin costs
experienced in the first half of 2010.
2009
compared with 2008
The $39 million, or 4%, decrease in net sales in 2009
compared with 2008 was primarily due to decreases in unit volume
in Europe of $29 million, or 7%, and in North America of
$13 million, or 3%. The decrease in unit volume in Europe
was primarily due to the unfavorable impact of reduced
consumption of certain meats in some countries, which in turn
resulted in lower sales of our case-ready packaging products.
The decrease in North America was primarily due to lower sales
of our vertical pouch packaging products to customers in the
foodservice sector. The unit volume decreases in Europe and
North America reflected the economic weakness in these regions.
Outsourced
Products
In addition to net sales from products produced in our
facilities, net trade sales in this segment were also
attributable to the sale of products fabricated by other
manufacturers, which we refer to as outsourced
products. Outsourced products include, among others, foam
and solid plastic trays and containers fabricated primarily in
North America and in Europe that largely support our case ready
products. We have strategically opted to use third-party
manufacturers for technically less complex products and selected
equipment in order to offer customers a broader range of
solutions. In each of the three years ended December 31,
2010, outsourced products represented approximately 17% of Food
Solutions net sales.
We have benefited from this strategy with increased net sales
and operating profit requiring minimal capital expenditures. Net
sales of outsourced products included in this segment amounted
to $159 million in 2010, $150 million in 2009 and
$170 million in 2008. In addition, we had sales of
$119 million in 2010, $90 million in 2009 and
$70 million in 2008 from the sales of outsourced products
in our other segments, primarily our Protective Packaging
segment.
Protective
Packaging Segment Net Sales
2010
compared with 2009
The $96 million, or 8%, increase in net sales in 2010
compared with 2009 was primarily the result of higher unit
volumes in North America of $60 million, or 9%, in
Europe of $24 million, or 7%, and in the Asia Pacific
region of $17 million, or 13%. These increases were
principally attributable to improving economic conditions in
these regions, which were consistent with manufacturing output
and export and shipping trends. Also contributing to the higher
unit volumes, to a lesser extent, was strength in
fulfillment/e-commerce applications.
32
2009
compared with 2008
The $238 million, or 16%, decrease in net sales in 2009
compared with 2008 was primarily the result of lower unit volume
in North America of $115 million, or 14%, and in
Europe of $70 million, or 16%. These declines were
principally attributable to continuing economic weakness in
these regions, which were consistent with manufacturing output
and export and shipping trends.
Other
Net Sales
2010
compared to 2009
The $17 million, or 5%, increase in 2010 compared with 2009
was primarily attributed to higher unit volumes in North America
of $12 million, or 11%, and in Europe of $16 million,
or 11%. These increases were primarily attributed to higher unit
volumes for some of our Specialty Materials products, which were
principally the result of improving economic conditions in these
regions, consistent with manufacturing output and export and
shipping trends. Partially offsetting these factors was lower
unit volumes in our Medical Applications business in Asia of
$13 million, or 38%, primarily due to the impact of an
April 2010 licensing expiration in China. Late in the third
quarter of 2010, our license was renewed.
2009
compared with 2008
The $73 million, or 18%, decrease in 2009 compared with
2008 was primarily attributed to lower unit volumes in North
America of $44 million, or 29%, and in Europe of
$27 million, or 14%. These declines were primarily
attributed to lower unit volumes for some of our Specialty
Materials products, which were principally the result of
continuing economic weakness in these regions consistent with
manufacturing output and export and shipping trends.
Cost of
Sales
Our primary input costs include resins, direct and indirect
labor, other raw materials and other input costs, including
energy-related costs and transportation costs. We utilize
petrochemical-based resins in the manufacture of many of our
products. The costs for these raw materials are impacted by the
rise and fall in crude oil and natural gas prices, since they
serve as feedstocks utilized in the production of most resins.
The prices for these feedstocks have been particularly volatile
in recent years as a result of changes in global demand. In
addition, supply and demand imbalances of intermediate compounds
such as benzene and supplier facility outages also impacted
resin costs. Although changes in the prices of crude oil and
natural gas are not perfect benchmarks, they are indicative of
the variations in raw materials and other input costs we face.
We continue to monitor changes in raw material and
energy-related costs as they occur and take pricing actions as
appropriate to lessen the impact of cost increases when they
occur.
In this cost of sales section and in the marketing,
administrative and development expenses section below, when we
refer to variable incentive compensation we are
referring to our annual U.S. profit sharing contribution
(in both sections) and our annual cash incentive compensation
(in the marketing, administrative and development expenses
section). Variable incentive compensation does not include our
share-based incentive compensation programs. Details about our
share-based incentive compensation programs are included in
Note 17, Stockholders Equity.
Cost of sales for the three years ended December 31, 2010
was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 vs. 2009
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
% Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
$
|
3,237.3
|
|
|
$
|
3,024.3
|
|
|
$
|
3,606.9
|
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
(16
|
)%
|
As a % of net sales
|
|
|
72
|
%
|
|
|
71
|
%
|
|
|
74
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
2010
compared with 2009
The $213 million increase in cost of sales in 2010 compared
with 2009 was primarily due to:
|
|
|
|
|
higher average petrochemical-based raw material expenditures due
to additional consumption from the 5% increase in sales volume
in 2010;
|
|
|
|
higher resin costs of approximately $130 million
attributable to the increased average cost per pound of resin in
2010;
|
|
|
|
higher other input costs, including transportation and
energy-related costs of $30 million in 2010; and
|
|
|
|
the unfavorable impact of foreign currency translation of
$53 million in 2010.
|
The factors above that drove the increase in cost of sales in
2010 compared with 2009 were partially offset by our supply
chain productivity improvements, including lower headcount in
2010 compared with 2009 despite higher unit volumes, and by the
benefits of producing products in our new, low-cost facilities
in developing regions.
Also partially offsetting the increase in cost of sales was
lower variable incentive compensation expenses of
$6 million in 2010 compared with 2009 because we did not
meet some of our 2010 financial performance goals.
Expenses included in cost of sales related to the implementation
of GMS were $4 million in 2010 compared with
$10 million in 2009.
2009
compared with 2008
The $583 million decrease in cost of sales in 2009 compared
with 2008 was primarily due to:
|
|
|
|
|
lower average petrochemical-based raw material expenditures of
approximately $200 million, which was primarily experienced
in the first nine months of 2009;
|
|
|
|
the favorable impact of foreign currency translation of
$185 million;
|
|
|
|
other lower input costs, including favorable freight and
energy-related costs in 2009, of approximately
$45 million; and
|
|
|
|
estimated benefits from our expense control initiatives and
other cost control measures in 2009, including approximately
$40 million of incremental benefits from our 2008 cost
reduction and productivity program and from GMS.
|
Expenses included in cost of sales related to the implementation
of GMS were $10 million in 2009 compared with
$7 million in 2008.
Marketing,
Administrative and Development Expenses
Marketing, administrative and development expenses for the three
years ended December 31, 2010 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 vs. 2009
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
% Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Marketing, administrative and development expenses
|
|
$
|
710.2
|
|
|
$
|
719.2
|
|
|
$
|
755.0
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)%
|
|
|
(5
|
)%
|
As a % of net sales
|
|
|
15.8
|
%
|
|
|
17.0
|
%
|
|
|
15.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
compared with 2009
Marketing, administrative and development expenses decreased
$9 million in 2010 compared with 2009. These expenses
decreased primarily due to lower incentive compensation expenses
of approximately $30 million in 2010, primarily because we
did not meet some of our 2010 financial performance goals. See
the table below for further details.
34
This factor was partially offset by:
|
|
|
|
|
higher sales and marketing costs to support the increase in net
sales in 2010 compared with 2009, including higher travel and
entertainment expenses of $20 million; and
|
|
|
|
additional research and development expenses of $5 million,
which includes spending related to innovation and new product
introductions.
|
Our variable incentive compensation expense includes annual cash
incentives and our annual U.S. profit sharing contribution.
We also have long-term, share-based incentive compensation that
is included in marketing, administrative and development
expenses. The table below shows the year over year changes in
these expenses in 2010 compared with 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 vs. 2009
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Annual cash incentive compensation
|
|
$
|
18.0
|
|
|
$
|
35.0
|
|
|
$
|
(17.0
|
)
|
Annual U.S. profit sharing contribution(1)
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
(11.0
|
)
|
Share-based incentive compensation
|
|
|
30.6
|
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
(8.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
66.6
|
|
|
$
|
102.8
|
|
|
$
|
(36.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Approximately $10 million in 2010 and $16 million in
2009 of our U.S. profit sharing contribution expense is included
in cost of sales. |
2009
compared with 2008
Marketing, administrative and development expenses decreased
$36 million in 2009 compared with 2008. These expenses
decreased due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
estimated benefits from our expense control initiatives and
other cost control measures in 2009, including approximately
$40 million of incremental benefits from our 2008 cost
reduction and productivity program, lower travel and
entertainment expenses and GMS; and
|
|
|
|
the favorable impact of foreign currency translation of
$31 million.
|
These decreases were partially offset by higher incentive
compensation expenses, including long-term share-based incentive
compensation of approximately $39 million in 2009, of which
approximately $30 million occurred in the fourth quarter of
2009, because we exceeded our 2009 financial performance goals
but did not meet our 2008 financial performance goals.
The table below shows the year over year changes in incentive
compensation expenses in 2009 compared with 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Annual cash incentive compensation
|
|
$
|
35.0
|
|
|
$
|
13.0
|
|
|
$
|
22.0
|
|
Annual U.S. profit sharing contribution
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
11.0
|
|
Share-based incentive compensation
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
|
|
22.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
102.8
|
|
|
$
|
47.5
|
|
|
$
|
55.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Approximately $16 million in 2009 and $10 million in
2008 of our U.S. profit sharing contribution expense is included
in cost of sales. |
35
Restructuring
Activities
Global
Manufacturing Strategy
We announced our global manufacturing strategy program in 2006
and completed the program in 2010. The goals of this multi-year
program were to realign our manufacturing footprint to expand
capacity in growing markets, to further improve our operating
efficiencies, and to implement new technologies more
effectively. Additionally, we optimized certain manufacturing
platforms in North America and Europe into centers of
excellence. By taking advantage of new technologies and
streamlining production on a global scale, we have continued to
enhance our profitable growth and our global leadership position
and have produced meaningful benefits.
At the inception of this multi-year program, we projected
cumulative capital expenditures and related costs to implement
this program to be approximately $220 million. The actual
amount was $235 million. A substantial portion of the
difference between the projected amount and the actual amount of
capital expenditures and related costs was due to foreign
currency translation.
The capital expenditures, associated costs and related
restructuring charges and the total amounts incurred since
inception of this multi-year program are included in the table
below. These associated costs and restructuring and other
charges have been excluded from our
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings per common share. See
Diluted Net Earnings Per Common Share below for
further details.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Through
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
$
|
3.3
|
|
|
$
|
20.0
|
|
|
$
|
59.5
|
|
|
$
|
156.0
|
|
Associated costs
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
36.2
|
|
Restructuring and other charges
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
19.3
|
|
|
|
42.7
|
|
We estimate that we realized approximately $25 million in
benefits in 2008, which increased to $45 million in 2009,
and increased further to $55 million in 2010. These
benefits are primarily realized in cost of sales.
European
Facility Closure
In December 2010, we informed affected employees that we would
be closing a small shrink packaging factory in Europe. We are
taking this action based on our review of operating costs and
technology levels in an effort to simplify our plant network and
improve our operating efficiency. We recorded associated costs
and restructuring and other charges of $7 million in 2010.
We will record the remaining costs of approximately $1 to
2 million in future years, mostly in 2011.
These associated costs and restructuring and other charges
related to this action have been excluded from our
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings per common share. See
Diluted Net Earnings Per Common Share below for
further details.
See Note 4, Restructuring Activities, for
additional information on GMS and our other recent restructuring
activities.
36
Operating
Profit
Management evaluates the performance of each reportable segment
based on its operating profit. Operating profit by our segment
reporting structure for the three years ended December 31,
2010 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 vs. 2009
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Food Packaging
|
|
$
|
262.7
|
|
|
$
|
251.7
|
|
|
$
|
217.5
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
16
|
%
|
As a % of Food Packaging net sales
|
|
|
13.7
|
%
|
|
|
13.7
|
%
|
|
|
11.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Food Solutions
|
|
|
99.2
|
|
|
|
85.7
|
|
|
|
80.0
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
As a % of Food Solutions net sales
|
|
|
10.6
|
%
|
|
|
9.6
|
%
|
|
|
8.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Protective Packaging
|
|
|
169.5
|
|
|
|
150.0
|
|
|
|
169.1
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
As a % of Protective Packaging net sales
|
|
|
13.0
|
%
|
|
|
12.6
|
%
|
|
|
11.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
11.2
|
|
|
|
11.9
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
As a % of Other net sales
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segments and other
|
|
|
542.6
|
|
|
|
499.3
|
|
|
|
481.6
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
As a % of net sales
|
|
|
12.1
|
%
|
|
|
11.8
|
%
|
|
|
9.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring and other charges(1)
|
|
|
7.6
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
85.1
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(92
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating profit
|
|
$
|
535.0
|
|
|
$
|
492.3
|
|
|
$
|
396.5
|
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a % of net sales
|
|
|
11.9
|
%
|
|
|
11.6
|
%
|
|
|
8.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Restructuring and other charges by our segment reporting
structure were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Food Packaging
|
|
$
|
3.7
|
|
|
$
|
6.0
|
|
|
$
|
46.2
|
|
Food Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
15.1
|
|
Protective Packaging
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
18.8
|
|
Other
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
7.6
|
|
|
$
|
7.0
|
|
|
$
|
85.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Restructuring Activities above for further
discussion of restructuring activities.
Food
Packaging Segment Operating Profit
2010
compared with 2009
The increase in operating profit in 2010 compared with 2009 was
primarily due to the favorable impact of the increase in unit
volumes mentioned above. Also contributing to this
segments increase in operating profit were lower
marketing, administrative and development expenses as a
percentage of net sales, which include the impact of lower
variable incentive compensation expenses mentioned above. These
factors were partially offset by higher average
petrochemical-based raw material expenditures of approximately
$51 million.
Expenses in this segment related to the implementation of GMS
were $3 million in 2010 compared with $8 million in
2009.
2009
compared with 2008
The increase in operating profit in 2009 compared with 2008 was
primarily due to lower input costs including favorable average
petrochemical-based raw material expenditures of approximately
$80 million and the favorable impact of product price/mix
of $46 million and freight and utilities costs of
approximately $16 million. Operating profit was also
favorably impacted by benefits from GMS and our expense control
initiatives and other cost control
37
measures in 2009 and 2008 as discussed above. These items were
partially offset by the decline in unit volumes discussed above.
Expenses in this segment related to the implementation of GMS
were $8 million in 2009 compared with $4 million in
2008.
Food
Solutions Segment Operating Profit
2010
compared with 2009
The increase in operating profit in 2010 compared with 2009 was
primarily due to the favorable impacts of the increase in unit
volumes and product price/mix, both mentioned above. Also
contributing to this segments increase in operating profit
were lower marketing, administrative and development expenses as
a percentage of net sales, which include the impact of lower
variable incentive compensation expenses mentioned above. These
factors were partially offset by higher average
petrochemical-based raw material expenditures of approximately
$30 million.
2009
compared with 2008
The increase in operating profit in 2009 compared with 2008 was
primarily due to lower input costs including favorable average
petrochemical-based raw material expenditures of approximately
$40 million and lower freight and utilities costs of
approximately $7 million. Operating profit was also
favorably impacted by benefits from our expense control
initiatives and other cost control measures in 2009 and 2008 as
discussed above. These items were partially offset by the
decline in unit volume discussed above.
Protective
Packaging Segment Operating Profit
2010
compared with 2009
The increase in operating profit in 2010 compared with 2009 was
primarily due to the favorable impact of the increase in unit
volumes mentioned above. Also contributing to this
segments increase in operating profit were lower
marketing, administrative and development expenses as a
percentage of net sales, which include the impact of lower
variable incentive compensation expenses mentioned above. These
factors were partially offset by higher average
petrochemical-based raw material expenditures of approximately
$35 million. Expenses included in this segments
operating profit related to the closure of a small factory in
Europe were $3 million in 2010.
2009
compared with 2008
The decrease in operating profit in 2009 compared with 2008 was
primarily due to the decline in unit volumes and unfavorable
product price/mix, both discussed above. These items were
partially offset by favorable average petrochemical-based raw
material expenditures of approximately $60 million and
lower freight and utilities costs of approximately
$30 million. Operating profit was also favorably impacted
by benefits from our expense control initiatives and other cost
control measures in 2009 and 2008, as discussed above.
Other
Operating Profit
2010
compared with 2009
The decrease in operating profit in 2010 compared with 2009 was
primarily due to higher average petrochemical-based raw material
expenditures of approximately $14 million. Also
contributing to the decline in operating profit were incremental
expenses related to our new ventures. These factors were
partially offset by the favorable impact of the increase in unit
volumes mentioned above.
2009
compared with 2008
The decrease in operating profit in 2009 compared with 2008 was
primarily due to the decline in unit volumes in our Specialty
Materials products discussed above. Partially offsetting this
decline were favorable average petrochemical-based raw material
expenditures of approximately $20 million, favorable
product price/mix of approximately $9 million, and
favorable freight and utilities costs of approximately
$7 million.
38
Interest
Expense
Interest expense includes the stated interest rate on our
outstanding debt, as well as the net impact of capitalized
interest, the effects of interest rate swaps and the
amortization of capitalized senior debt issuance costs, bond
discounts, and terminated treasury locks.
Interest expense for the three years ended December 31,
2010 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 vs. 2009
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Interest expense on the amount payable for the Settlement
agreement
|
|
$
|
41.1
|
|
|
$
|
39.0
|
|
|
$
|
36.9
|
|
|
$
|
2.1
|
|
|
$
|
2.1
|
|
Interest expense on our senior notes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.625% Senior Notes due July 2013
|
|
|
21.9
|
|
|
|
21.9
|
|
|
|
21.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12% Senior Notes due February 2014(1)
|
|
|
30.0
|
|
|
|
30.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
30.9
|
|
7.875% Senior Notes due June 2017, issued June 2009
|
|
|
33.0
|
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.4
|
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
6.875% Senior Notes due July 2033
|
|
|
30.9
|
|
|
|
30.9
|
|
|
|
30.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3% Convertible Senior Notes redeemed July 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
14.4
|
|
|
|
(8.0
|
)
|
|
|
(6.4
|
)
|
6.95% Senior Notes matured May 2009(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
16.1
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
(12.5
|
)
|
5.375% Senior Notes matured April 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7.1
|
)
|
Other interest expense
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Less: capitalized interest
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
(6.7
|
)
|
|
|
(9.3
|
)
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
161.6
|
|
|
$
|
154.9
|
|
|
$
|
128.1
|
|
|
$
|
6.7
|
|
|
$
|
26.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We redeemed $150 million of these notes in December 2010.
See Loss on Debt Redemption below. |
|
(2) |
|
A substantial portion of these notes were retired prior to their
maturity. |
Gains on
Sale
(Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment) of
Available-for-Sale
Securities
In 2010, we sold our five auction rate security investments,
representing our total holdings of these securities. These sales
resulted in a pre-tax gain of $7 million ($4 million,
net of taxes). Before we sold these investments, we recognized
$1 million of pre-tax
other-than-temporary
impairment in 2010 due to the decline in estimated fair value of
some of these investments.
Our valuation of our auction rate security investments resulted
in the recognition of
other-than-temporary
impairment of $4 million ($2 million, net of taxes) in
2009 and $34 million ($22 million, net of taxes) in
2008.
The gains and losses associated with our auction rate security
investments have been excluded from our
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings per common share. See
Diluted Net Earnings Per Common Share below for
further details.
See Note 5,
Available-for-Sale
Investments, for further discussion.
Foreign
Currency Exchange (Losses) Gains Related to Venezuelan
Subsidiary
Effective January 1, 2010, Venezuela was designated a
highly inflationary economy. The foreign currency exchange gains
and losses we recorded in 2010 for our Venezuelan subsidiary
were the result of two factors: 1) the significant changes
in the exchange rates used to settle bolivar-denominated
transactions and 2) the significant changes in the exchange
rates used to remeasure our Venezuelan subsidiarys
financial statements at the balance sheet date. We believe these
gains and losses are attributable to an unpredictable foreign
currency environment in
39
Venezuela. As a result, we have excluded these gains and losses
and we will exclude future non-operating gains
and/or
losses relating to our Venezuelan subsidiary from our
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings per common share until such time
that we believe the foreign exchange environment in Venezuela
stabilizes. See Venezuela in Foreign Exchange
Rates of Item 7A, Quantitative and Qualitative
Disclosures About Market Risk, for further discussion on
Venezuela.
Loss on
Debt Redemption
In December 2010, we completed an early redemption of
$150 million of the outstanding $300 million principal
amount of our 12% Senior Notes due February 14, 2014.
We redeemed the notes at 127% of the principal amount plus
accrued interest. The aggregate redemption price was
$196 million, including $5 million of accrued
interest. We funded the redemption with available cash. We
recorded a pre-tax loss of $41 million resulting from the
27% premium. We also recognized a gain of $2 million from
the termination of a related interest rate swap. As a result,
the total net pre-tax loss was $39 million, which equated
to a $0.14 per common share decrease to our reported diluted net
earnings per common share. The annual pre-tax interest expense
savings from this redemption is $18 million, which equates
to $0.06 per diluted common share, beginning in December 2010
through February 2014.
In 2009, we redeemed the entire $431.3 million of our
3% Convertible Senior Notes due 2033 and recorded a
$3 million pre-tax loss. This loss represented a 0.429%
call premium of $2 million and a write-down of the
remaining debt issuance costs of $1 million related to the
issuance of these senior notes in July 2003.
The losses associated with our debt redemptions have been
excluded from our
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings per common share. See
Diluted Net Earnings Per Common Share below for
further details.
Other
Expense, Net
See Note 19, Other Expense, net, for the
components and discussion of other expense, net.
Income
Taxes
Our effective income tax rate was 25.5% for 2010, 25.9% for 2009
and 19.1% for 2008. As described below, in each of those years,
we recognized benefits for items that may not recur to the same
extent in future years. As such, we expect an effective income
tax rate of approximately 27% for 2011. Our 2011 effective tax
rate may be higher if we fund the Settlement agreement in 2011.
We anticipate that funding the Settlement agreement in 2011 will
result in a loss for U.S. income tax return purposes. This
loss will eliminate some tax benefits in 2011, primarily the
domestic manufacturing deduction.
For 2010, our effective income tax rate was lower than the
statutory U.S. federal income tax rate of 35% primarily due
to the lower net effective income tax rate on foreign earnings,
as well as income tax benefits from tax credits and the domestic
manufacturing deduction, partially offset by state income taxes.
Our 2009 effective income tax rate was lower than the statutory
U.S. federal income tax rate for the same reasons as in
2010, except that the benefits were offset by an increase in
accruals relating to uncertain tax positions.
See Note 15, Income Taxes, for a reconciliation
of the U.S. federal statutory rate to our effective tax
rate, which also shows the major components of the year over
year changes.
40
Diluted
Net Earnings per Common Share
The following table presents a reconciliation of U.S. GAAP
diluted net earnings per common share to
non-U.S. GAAP
adjusted diluted net earnings per common share for the three
years ended December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
U.S. GAAP diluted net earnings per common share
|
|
$
|
1.44
|
|
|
$
|
1.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.99
|
|
Net earnings effect resulting from the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add: Losses on debt redemptions of $24.3, net of taxes of $14.2
in 2010 and $2.1, net of taxes of $1.3 in 2009
|
|
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
0.01
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add: Global manufacturing strategy and restructuring and other
charges of $5.1, net of taxes of $2.3 in 2010, $11.4, net of
taxes of $5.3 in 2009 and $18.0, net of taxes of $8.6 in 2008
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.07
|
|
|
|
0.10
|
|
Add: Cost reduction and productivity program restructuring
charge of $43.5, net of taxes of $22.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.23
|
|
Add: European manufacturing facility closure restructuring and
other charges of $4.8, net of taxes of $2.1
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Less) / add: (Gains on sale)
other-than-temporary
impairment of
available-for-sale
securities of $(3.7), net of taxes of $(2.2) in 2010, $2.5, net
of taxes of $1.5 in 2009 and $21.4, net of taxes of $12.6 in 2008
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
0.01
|
|
|
|
0.11
|
|
(Less): Foreign currency exchange losses related to Venezuelan
subsidiary of $3.6, net of taxes of $1.9
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reversal of tax accruals, net, and related interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.03
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
GAAP adjusted diluted net earnings per common share
|
|
$
|
1.60
|
|
|
$
|
1.44
|
|
|
$
|
1.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Note 18, Net Earnings Per Common Share, for
further details on the calculation of U.S. GAAP basic and
diluted net earnings per common share.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The discussion that follows contains:
|
|
|
|
|
a description of our material commitments and contingencies;
|
|
|
|
a description of our principal sources of liquidity;
|
|
|
|
a description of our outstanding indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
an analysis of our historical cash flows and changes in working
capital;
|
|
|
|
a description of changes in our stockholders
equity; and
|
|
|
|
a description of our derivative financial instruments.
|
Material
Commitments and Contingencies
Settlement
Agreement and Related Costs
We recorded a pre-tax charge of $850.1 million in 2002, of
which $512.5 million represents a cash payment that we are
required to make (subject to the satisfaction of the terms and
conditions of the Settlement agreement) upon the effectiveness
of a plan of reorganization in the bankruptcy of W.R.
Grace & Co. We did not use cash in any period with
respect to this liability.
We currently expect to fund a substantial portion of this
payment when it becomes due by using accumulated cash and cash
equivalents with the remainder from our committed credit
facilities. Our global credit facility and European credit
facility are available for general corporate purposes, including
the payment of the amounts required upon effectiveness of the
Settlement agreement. See Principal Sources of
Liquidity below. The cash payment of
41
$512.5 million accrues interest at a 5.5% annual rate,
which is compounded annually, from December 21, 2002 to the
date of payment. This accrued interest was $275 million at
December 31, 2010 and is recorded in Settlement agreement
and related accrued interest on our consolidated balance sheet.
The total liability on our consolidated balance sheet was
$788 million at December 31, 2010. In addition, the
Settlement agreement provides for the issuance of
18 million shares of our common stock. Since the impact of
issuing these shares is dilutive, under U.S. GAAP, they
have been included in our calculation of diluted net earnings
per common share for all periods presented.
Tax benefits resulting from the payment made under the
Settlement agreement, which are currently recorded as deferred
tax assets on our consolidated balance sheets, are anticipated
to provide approximately $370 million of current and future
cash tax benefits. These deferred tax assets reflect the cash
portion of the Settlement agreement and related accrued interest
and the fair market value of the 18 million shares of our
common stock at a post-split price of $17.86 per share, which
was the price when the Settlement agreement was reached in 2002.
The amount and timing of future cash tax benefits could vary,
depending on the amount of cash paid by us and various facts and
circumstances at the time of payment under the Settlement
agreement, including the price of our common stock, our tax
position and the applicable tax codes. Any changes in the tax
benefits resulting from an increase in our stock price in excess
of the $17.86 share price mentioned above will not have an
impact on our net earnings.
Additionally we may incur an approximate one percentage point
increase in our effective income tax rate during the calendar
year in which we make the payment under the Settlement. We
anticipate that funding the Settlement agreement will result in
a loss for U.S. income tax purposes, and this loss will
eliminate some tax benefits for that year, primarily the
domestic manufacturing deduction.
While the Bankruptcy Court has confirmed the PI Settlement Plan,
additional proceedings may be held before the District Court or
other courts to consider matters related to the PI Settlement
Plan. Additionally, various parties have filed notices of appeal
or have otherwise challenged the Memorandum Opinion and
Confirmation Order, and the PI Settlement Plan may be subject to
further appeal or challenge by additional parties. Parties filed
a number of objections to the PI Settlement Plan, and some of
these objections concerned injunctions, releases and provisions
as applied to us
and/or that
are contemplated by the Settlement agreement. Such parties (or
others) may appeal or otherwise challenge the Bankruptcy
Courts Memorandum Opinion and Confirmation Order, or
otherwise continue to oppose the PI Settlement Plan. We do not
know whether or when a final plan of reorganization will become
effective or whether the final plan will be consistent with the
terms of the Settlement agreement.
As mentioned in 2011 Outlook above, our full year
2011 diluted net earnings per common share guidance continues to
exclude the payment under the Settlement agreement, as the
timing is unknown. Payment under the Settlement agreement is
expected to be accretive to our post-payment diluted net
earnings per common share by approximately $0.12 to $0.14
annually. This range primarily represents the accretive impact
on our net earnings from ceasing to accrue any future interest
on the settlement amount following the payment.
The information set forth in Part II, Item 8 of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
in Note 16, Commitments and Contingencies,
under the caption Settlement Agreement and Related
Costs is incorporated herein by reference.
Cryovac
Transaction Commitments and Contingencies
The information set forth in Part II, Item 8 of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
in Note 16, Commitments and Contingencies,
under the caption Cryovac Transaction Commitments and
Contingencies is incorporated herein by reference.
42
Contractual
Obligations
The following table summarizes our principal contractual
obligations and sets forth the amounts of required or
contingently required cash outlays in 2011 and future years
(amounts in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Years
|
|
Contractual Obligations
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012-2013
|
|
|
2014-2015
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
23.5
|
|
|
$
|
23.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt exclusive of debt discounts
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, exclusive of debt discounts
|
|
|
1,408.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
401.7
|
|
|
|
156.5
|
|
|
|
850.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt(1)
|
|
|
1,438.5
|
|
|
|
30.0
|
|
|
|
401.7
|
|
|
|
156.5
|
|
|
|
850.3
|
|
Interest payments due on long-term debt(2)
|
|
|
1,013.9
|
|
|
|
102.9
|
|
|
|
195.5
|
|
|
|
127.0
|
|
|
|
588.5
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
121.9
|
|
|
|
33.8
|
|
|
|
44.0
|
|
|
|
23.2
|
|
|
|
20.9
|
|
Settlement agreement and related accrued interest(3)
|
|
|
787.9
|
|
|
|
787.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter 2011 quarterly cash dividend declared
|
|
|
20.7
|
|
|
|
20.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other principal contractual obligations
|
|
|
285.7
|
|
|
|
129.9
|
|
|
|
135.4
|
|
|
|
20.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual cash obligations
|
|
$
|
3,668.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,105.2
|
|
|
$
|
776.6
|
|
|
$
|
327.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,459.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
These amounts include principal maturities (at face value) only.
These amounts also include our contractual obligations under
capital leases of $6.2 million in 2011, $1.2 million
in 2012-2013
and $0.1 million in
2014-2015. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes interest payments required under our senior notes
issuances only. |
|
(3) |
|
This liability is reflected as a current liability due to the
uncertainty of the timing of payment. Interest accrues on this
amount at a rate of 5.5% per annum, compounded annually, until
it becomes due and payable. |
Current Portion of Long-Term Debt and Long-Term
Debt The debt shown in the above table excludes
unamortized bond discounts as of December 31, 2010 and
therefore represents the principal amount of the debt required
to be repaid in each period.
Operating Leases The contractual operating
lease obligations listed in the table above represent estimated
future minimum annual rental commitments primarily under
non-cancelable real and personal property leases as of
December 31, 2010.
Cash Portion of the Settlement Agreement The
Settlement agreement is described more fully in Settlement
Agreement and Related Costs, of Note 16,
Commitments and Contingencies.
Other Principal Contractual Obligations Other
principal contractual obligations include agreements to purchase
an estimated amount of goods, including raw materials, or
services, including energy, in the normal course of business.
These obligations are enforceable and legally binding and
specify all significant terms, including fixed or minimum
quantities to be purchased, minimum or variable price provisions
and the approximate timing of the purchase.
Liability
for Unrecognized Tax Benefits
At December 31, 2010, we had liabilities for unrecognized
tax benefits and related interest of $11 million, which is
included in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheet.
At December 31, 2010, we cannot reasonably estimate the
future period or periods of cash settlement of these
liabilities. See Note 15, Income Taxes, for
further discussion.
43
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
We have reviewed our off-balance sheet arrangements and have
determined that none of those arrangements has a material
current effect or is reasonably likely to have a material future
effect on our consolidated financial statements, liquidity,
capital expenditures or capital resources.
Income
Tax Payments
We currently expect to pay between $100 million and
$115 million in income taxes in 2011, assuming we do not
make the Settlement agreement payment in 2011. If we were to
make the Settlement agreement payment in 2011, we would cease
making quarterly estimated U.S. federal tax payments, thus
significantly reducing our cash payments.
Contributions
to Defined Benefit Pension Plans
We maintain defined benefit pension plans for a limited number
of our U.S. employees and for some of our
non-U.S. employees.
We currently expect employer contributions to be approximately
$15 million in 2011.
Environmental
Matters
We are subject to loss contingencies resulting from
environmental laws and regulations, and we accrue for
anticipated costs associated with investigatory and remediation
efforts when an assessment has indicated that a loss is probable
and can be reasonably estimated. These accruals do not take into
account any discounting for the time value of money and are not
reduced by potential insurance recoveries, if any. We do not
believe that it is reasonably possible that the liability in
excess of the amounts that we have accrued for environmental
matters will be material to our consolidated statements of
operations, balance sheets or cash flows. We reassess
environmental liabilities whenever circumstances become better
defined or we can better estimate remediation efforts and their
costs. We evaluate these liabilities periodically based on
available information, including the progress of remedial
investigations at each site, the current status of discussions
with regulatory authorities regarding the methods and extent of
remediation and the apportionment of costs among potentially
responsible parties. As some of these issues are decided (the
outcomes of which are subject to uncertainties) or new sites are
assessed and costs can be reasonably estimated, we adjust the
recorded accruals, as necessary. We believe that these exposures
are not material to our consolidated financial position and
results of operations. We believe that we have adequately
reserved for all probable and estimable environmental exposures.
Principal
Sources of Liquidity
We require cash to fund our operating expenses, capital
expenditures, interest, taxes and dividend payments and to pay
our debt obligations and other long-term liabilities as they
come due. Our principal sources of liquidity are cash flows from
operations, accumulated cash and amounts available under our
existing lines of credit described below, including the global
credit facility and the European credit facility, and our
accounts receivable securitization program.
We believe that our current liquidity position and future cash
flows from operations will enable us to fund our operations,
including all of the items mentioned above, and the cash payment
under the Settlement agreement should it become payable within
the next 12 months.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
The following table summarizes our accumulated cash and cash
equivalents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
675.6
|
|
|
$
|
694.5
|
|
44
See Analysis of Historical Cash Flows below.
Lines
of Credit
At December 31, 2010, there were no amounts outstanding
under our global and European credit facilities, and we had
$669 million available to us under these facilities. We did
not borrow funds from these facilities during any period in 2010.
Further information about our lines of credit, our outstanding
long-term debt and the related financial covenants and
limitations is provided in Note 11, Debt and Credit
Facilities.
Accounts
Receivable Securitization Program
At December 31, 2010, we had $91 million available to
us under the program, and we did not utilize this program in
2010.
See Note 6, Accounts Receivable Securitization
Program, for information concerning this program.
Covenants
At December 31, 2010, we were in compliance with our
financial covenants and limitations, as discussed in
Covenants of Note 11, Debt and Credit
Facilities.
Debt
Ratings
Our cost of capital and ability to obtain external financing may
be affected by our debt ratings, which the credit rating
agencies review periodically. The Company and our long-term
senior unsecured debt are currently rated BB+ (positive outlook)
by Standard & Poors. On November 18, 2010,
Standard & Poors revised our ratings outlook to
positive from stable. This rating is considered non-investment
grade. The Company and our long-term senior unsecured debt are
currently rated Baa3 by Moodys. This rating is considered
investment grade. On May 4, 2010, Moodys revised our
ratings outlook to stable from negative. If our credit ratings
are downgraded, there could be a negative impact on our ability
to access capital markets and borrowing costs could increase. A
credit rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold
securities and may be subject to revision or withdrawal at any
time by the rating organization. Each rating should be evaluated
independently of any other rating.
Outstanding
Indebtedness
At December 31, 2010 and 2009, our total debt outstanding
consisted of the amounts set forth in the following table. See
Note 11, Debt and Credit Facilities, for
further information on our debt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
23.5
|
|
|
$
|
28.2
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current debt
|
|
|
30.0
|
|
|
|
34.7
|
|
Total long-term debt, less current portion
|
|
|
1,399.2
|
|
|
|
1,626.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
$
|
1,429.2
|
|
|
$
|
1,661.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analysis
of Historical Cash Flow
Changes in our consolidated cash flows in the three years ended
December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$
|
483.1
|
|
|
$
|
552.0
|
|
|
$
|
404.4
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(96.9
|
)
|
|
|
(70.3
|
)
|
|
|
(176.7
|
)
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
|
(373.0
|
)
|
|
|
90.3
|
|
|
|
(562.9
|
)
|
45
Net
Cash Provided by Operating Activities
2010
Net cash provided by operating activities of $483 million
for 2010 was primarily attributable to net income adjusted for
non-cash items of $480 million, which included depreciation
and amortization of $155 million, share-based compensation
of $31 million and the loss on debt redemption of
$39 million. Changes in operating assets and liabilities
resulted in a net cash source of $3 million.
2009
Net cash provided by operating activities of $552 million
for 2009 was primarily attributable to net income adjusted for
non-cash items of $440 million, which included depreciation
and amortization of $155 million and share-based
compensation of $39 million. Changes in operating assets
and liabilities provided a net cash source of $112 million
primarily due to:
|
|
|
|
|
a decline in receivables, net, of $115 million, primarily
attributable to the impact of lower net sales in 2009 and, to a
lesser extent, improved collections in 2009; and
|
|
|
|
a decline in inventories of $110 million primarily due to
maintaining lower inventory levels due to the decline in sales
volumes and the decline in average petrochemical-based raw
material costs experienced in 2009;
|
partially offset by:
|
|
|
|
|
use of available cash of $80 million to fund the repurchase
of receivable interests in 2009; and
|
|
|
|
cash used for accounts payable of $68 million primarily due
to the timing of payments.
|
Net
Cash Used in Investing Activities
2010
In 2010, we used net cash of $97 million for investing
activities, which was primarily due to capital expenditures of
$88 million and the use of $24 million of cash for the
completion of three business acquisitions and one equity
investment in 2010. These investments were not material,
individually or in the aggregate, to our consolidated financial
position or results of operations. Partially offsetting these
uses of cash in 2010 were cash proceeds of $13 million
received from the sale of all of our auction rate security
investments in 2010.
2009
In 2009, we used net cash of $70 million for investing
activities, which was primarily due to capital expenditures of
$80 million. During 2009, we completed the construction
phase of GMS with the launch of our manufacturing facility in
Poland.
We expect to continue to invest capital as we deem appropriate
to expand our business, to maintain or replace depreciating
property, plant and equipment, to acquire new manufacturing
technology and to improve productivity and sales growth. We
expect total capital expenditures in 2011 to be in the range of
$150 million to $175 million. This projection is based
upon our capital expenditure budget for 2011, the status of
approved but not yet completed capital projects, anticipated
future projects and historic spending trends. This projection
also supports targeted cost-reduction initiatives globally. We
expect to maintain this range of capital expenditures over the
next several years to support our projected increases in unit
volume growth using new technology platforms or otherwise
requiring incremental capital.
46
Net
Cash (Used in) Provided By Financing Activities
2010
In 2010, we used $373 million of cash and cash equivalents
for financing activities primarily due to the following
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
the use of $196 million of cash for the redemption of
$150 million of the outstanding $300 million principal
amount of our 12% Senior Notes due February 14, 2014;
|
|
|
|
the repayment of amounts outstanding under our European credit
facility of $64 million in the first quarter of 2010;
|
|
|
|
the payment of quarterly dividends of $80 million; and
|
|
|
|
the repurchase of 0.4 million shares of our common stock
for $10 million.
|
2009
In 2009, our financing activities provided a net
$90 million of cash and cash equivalents, primarily due to
the following activities:
|
|
|
|
|
issuance of $400 million of 7.875% Senior Notes due
June 2017;
|
|
|
|
issuance of $300 million of 12% Senior Notes due
February 2014; and
|
|
|
|
funds drawn of $64 million under our European credit
facility;
|
partially offset by:
|
|
|
|
|
redemption of the entire $431.3 million of our
3% Convertible Senior Notes;
|
|
|
|
retirement of the remaining outstanding balance of
$137 million of our 6.95% Senior Notes; and
|
|
|
|
the payment of quarterly dividends of $76 million.
|
Repurchases
of Capital Stock
During 2010, we repurchased 0.4 million shares of our
common stock, par value $0.10 per share, in open market
purchases at a cost of $10 million. The average price per
share of these common stock repurchases was $22.91. During 2009,
we did not repurchase any shares of common stock. During 2008,
we repurchased 4 million shares of our common stock in open
market purchases at a cost of $95 million. The average
price per share of these common stock repurchases in 2008 was
$23.64.
We made the share repurchases in 2010 and 2008 under the share
repurchase program adopted by our Board of Directors in August
2007 under which the Board of Directors authorized us to
repurchase in the aggregate up to 20 million shares of its
issued and outstanding common stock. The program has no set
expiration date, and we may from time to time continue to
repurchase our common stock. See Item 5, Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities, for further information on
the share repurchase program.
Changes
in Working Capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
Working capital (current assets less current liabilities)
|
|
$
|
592.3
|
|
|
$
|
639.6
|
|
|
$
|
(47.3
|
)
|
Current ratio (current assets divided by current liabilities)
|
|
|
1.4
|
x
|
|
|
1.4
|
x
|
|
|
|
|
Quick ratio (current assets, less inventories divided by current
liabilities)
|
|
|
1.1
|
x
|
|
|
1.1x
|
|
|
|
|
|
47
The 7% decrease in working capital in the year ended
December 31, 2010 compared with 2009 was primarily due to
the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities of $373 million,
primarily due to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
the repayment of long-term debt of $276 million;
|
|
|
|
cash used for the payment of our quarterly dividends of
$80 million; and
|
|
|
|
cash used for the repurchase of common stock of $10 million;
|
|
|
|
|
|
net cash flows used in investing activities of $97 million,
primarily for capital expenditures; and
|
|
|
|
a decrease in current deferred tax assets of $30 million,
primarily due to the reclassification of certain tax benefits
from current to long-term assets;
|
partially offset by:
|
|
|
|
|
net cash flows from operations of $483 million.
|
Changes
in Stockholders Equity
The $201 million, or 9%, increase in stockholders
equity in 2010 compared with 2009 was primarily due to the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
an increase in retained earnings of $175 million,
reflecting the net impact in 2010 from net earnings of
$256 million, less dividends paid and accrued on our common
stock of $81 million; and
|
|
|
|
an increase in additional paid-in capital of $26 million,
primarily due to the recognition of our share-based incentive
compensation expenses.
|
Derivative
Financial Instruments
Interest
Rate Swaps
The information set forth in Part II, Item 8 of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
in Note 12, Derivatives and Hedging Activities,
under the caption Interest Rate Swaps is
incorporated herein by reference.
Foreign
Currency Forward Contracts
At December 31, 2010, we were party to foreign currency
forward contracts, which did not have a significant impact on
our liquidity.
The information set forth in Part II, Item 8 of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
in Note 12, Derivatives and Hedging Activities,
under the caption Foreign Currency Forward Contracts
is incorporated herein by reference.
For further discussion about these contracts and other financial
instruments, see Item 7A, Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Recently
Issued Statements of Financial Accounting Standards, Accounting
Guidance and Disclosure Requirements
We are subject to numerous recently issued statements of
financial accounting standards, accounting guidance and
disclosure requirements. Note 2, Summary of
Significant Accounting Policies and Recently Issued Accounting
Standards, which is contained in Part II, Item 8
of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
describes these new accounting standards and is incorporated
herein by reference.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our consolidated financial
position and results of operations are based upon our
consolidated financial statements, which are prepared in
accordance with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of consolidated
financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires
management to make estimates and
48
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets,
liabilities, revenues and expenses and the disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities.
Our estimates and assumptions are evaluated on an ongoing basis
and are based on all available evidence, including historical
experience and other factors believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances. To derive these estimates and assumptions,
management draws from those available sources that can best
contribute to its efforts. These sources include our officers
and other employees, outside consultants and legal counsel,
experts and actuaries. In addition, we use internally generated
reports and statistics, such as aging of accounts receivable, as
well as outside sources such as government statistics, industry
reports and third-party research studies. The results of these
estimates and assumptions may form the basis of the carrying
value of assets and liabilities and may not be readily apparent
from other sources. Actual results may differ from estimates
under conditions and circumstances different from those assumed,
and any such differences may be material to our consolidated
financial statements.
We believe the following accounting policies are critical to
understanding our consolidated results of operations and affect
the more significant judgments and estimates used in the
preparation of our consolidated financial statements. The
critical accounting policies discussed below should be read
together with our significant accounting policies set forth in
Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
and Recently Issued Accounting Standards.
Accounts
Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
In the normal course of business, we extend credit to our
customers if they satisfy pre-defined credit criteria. We
maintain an accounts receivable allowance for estimated losses
resulting from the failure of our customers to make required
payments. An additional allowance may be required if the
financial condition of our customers deteriorates. The allowance
for doubtful accounts is maintained at a level that management
assesses to be appropriate to absorb estimated losses in the
accounts receivable portfolio. The allowance for doubtful
accounts is reviewed quarterly, and changes to the allowance are
made through the provision for bad debts, which is included in
marketing, administrative and development expenses on our
consolidated statements of operations. These changes may reflect
changes in economic, business and market conditions. The
allowance is increased by the provision for bad debts and
decreased by the amount of charge-offs, net of recoveries.
The provision for bad debts charged against operating results is
based on several factors including, but not limited to, a
regular assessment of the collectibility of specific customer
balances, the length of time a receivable is past due and our
historical experience with our customers. In circumstances where
a specific customers inability to meet its financial
obligations is known, we record a specific provision for bad
debt against amounts due thereby reducing the receivable to the
amount we reasonably assess will be collected. If circumstances
change, such as higher than expected defaults or an unexpected
material adverse change in a major customers ability to
pay, our estimates of recoverability could be reduced by a
material amount.
Fair
Value Measurements
In determining fair value of financial instruments, we utilize
valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs
and minimize the use of unobservable inputs to the extent
possible and consider counterparty credit risk in our assessment
of fair value. We determine fair value of our financial
instruments based on assumptions that market participants would
use in pricing an asset or liability in the principal or most
advantageous market. When considering market participant
assumptions in fair value measurements, the following fair value
hierarchy distinguishes between observable and unobservable
inputs, which are categorized in one of the following levels:
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1 Inputs: Unadjusted quoted prices
in active markets for identical assets or liabilities accessible
to the reporting entity at the measurement date.
|
|
|
|
Level 2 Inputs: Other than quoted prices
included in Level 1 inputs that are observable for the
asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for
substantially the full term of the asset or liability.
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Inputs: Unobservable inputs for
the asset or liability used to measure fair value to the extent
that observable inputs are not available, thereby allowing for
situations in which there is little, if any, market activity for
the asset or liability at measurement date.
|
Our fair value measurements for our financial instruments are
subjective and involve uncertainties and matters of significant
judgment. Changes in assumptions could significantly affect our
estimates. See Note 13, Fair Value Measurements and
Other Financial Instruments, for further details on our
fair value measurements.
Commitments
and Contingencies Litigation
On an ongoing basis, we assess the potential liabilities and
costs related to any lawsuits or claims brought against us. We
accrue a liability when we believe a loss is probable and when
the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Litigation
proceedings are evaluated on a
case-by-case
basis considering the available information, including that
received from internal and outside legal counsel, to assess
potential outcomes. While it is typically very difficult to
determine the timing and ultimate outcome of these actions, we
use our best judgment to determine if it is probable that we
will incur an expense related to the settlement or final
adjudication of these matters and whether a reasonable
estimation of the probable loss, if any, can be made. In
assessing probable losses, we consider insurance recoveries, if
any. We expense legal costs, including those legal costs
expected to be incurred in connection with a loss contingency,
as incurred. We have in the past adjusted existing accruals as
proceedings have continued, been settled or otherwise provided
further information on which we could review the likelihood of
outflows of resources and their measurability, and we expect to
do so in future periods. Due to the inherent uncertainties
related to the eventual outcome of litigation and potential
insurance recovery, it is possible that disputed matters may be
resolved for amounts materially different from any provisions or
disclosures that we have previously made.
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets
The determination of the value of long-lived assets requires
management to make assumptions and estimates that affect our
consolidated financial statements. We periodically review
long-lived assets other than goodwill for impairment whenever
there is evidence that events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying amount of an asset or asset group may
not be recoverable.
Assumptions and estimates used in the determination of
impairment losses, such as future cash flows, which are based on
operational performance, market conditions and other factors,
and disposition costs, may affect the carrying value of
long-lived assets and result in possible impairment expense in
our consolidated financial statements. As assumptions and
estimates change in the future, we may be required to record an
impairment charge.
Goodwill
Goodwill is reviewed for possible impairment at least annually
on a reporting unit level during the fourth quarter of each
year. A review of goodwill may be initiated before or after
conducting the annual analysis if events or changes in
circumstances indicate the carrying value of goodwill may no
longer be recoverable.
A reporting unit is the operating segment unless, at businesses
one level below that operating segment the
component level discrete financial
information is prepared and regularly reviewed by management,
and the component has economic characteristics that are
different from the economic characteristics of the other
components of the operating segment, in which case the component
is the reporting unit.
We use a fair value approach to test goodwill for impairment. We
must recognize a non-cash impairment charge for the amount, if
any, by which the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its
implied fair value. We derive an estimate of fair values for
each of our reporting units using a combination of an income
approach and appropriate market approaches, each based on an
applicable weighting. We assess the applicable weighting based
on such factors as current market conditions and the quality and
reliability of the data. Absent an indication of fair value from
a potential buyer or similar specific transactions, we believe
that the use of these methods provides a reasonable estimate of
a reporting units fair value.
50
Fair value computed by these methods is arrived at using a
number of factors, including projected future operating results,
anticipated future cash flows, effective income tax rates,
comparable marketplace data within a consistent industry
grouping, and the cost of capital. There are inherent
uncertainties, however, related to these factors and to our
judgment in applying them to this analysis. Nonetheless, we
believe that the combination of these methods provides a
reasonable approach to estimate the fair value of our reporting
units. Assumptions for sales, net earnings and cash flows for
each reporting unit were consistent among these methods.
Income
Approach Used to Determine Fair Values
The income approach is based upon the present value of expected
cash flows. Expected cash flows are converted to present value
using factors that consider the timing and risk of the future
cash flows. The estimate of cash flows used is prepared on an
unleveraged debt-free basis. We use a discount rate that
reflects a market-derived weighted average cost of capital. We
believe that this approach is appropriate because it provides a
fair value estimate based upon the reporting units
expected long-term operating and cash flow performance. The
projections are based upon our best estimates of projected
economic and market conditions over the related period including
growth rates, estimates of future expected changes in operating
margins and cash expenditures. Other significant estimates and
assumptions include terminal value long-term growth rates,
provisions for income taxes, future capital expenditures and
changes in future cashless, debt-free working capital.
Market
Approaches Used to Determine Fair Values
Each year we consider various market approaches that could be
used to determine fair value. Historically, we have considered
two relevant market approaches. In 2010, an additional relevant
market approach was included to determine fair value, and this
approach is referred to as the merger and acquisition method.
The first market approach estimates the fair value of the
reporting unit by applying multiples of operating performance
measures to the reporting units operating performance.
These multiples are derived from comparable publicly-traded
companies with similar investment characteristics to the
reporting unit, and such comparables are reviewed and updated as
needed annually. We believe that this approach is appropriate
because it provides a fair value estimate using multiples from
entities with operations and economic characteristics comparable
to our reporting units and the Company. The second market
approach is based on the publicly traded common stock of the
Company, and the estimate of fair value of the reporting unit is
based on the applicable multiples of the Company. The third
market approach is based on recent mergers and acquisitions of
comparable publicly-traded and privately-held companies in the
packaging industry.
The key estimates and assumptions that are used to determine
fair value under these market approaches include trailing and
future
12-month
operating performance results and the selection of the relevant
multiples to be applied. Under the first and second market
approaches, a control premium, or an amount that a buyer is
usually willing to pay over the current market price of a
publicly traded company, is applied to the calculated equity
values to adjust the public trading value upward for a 100%
ownership interest, where applicable.
See Note 9, Goodwill and Identifiable Intangible
Assets, for details of our goodwill balance and the
goodwill review performed in 2010 and other related information.
Pensions
We maintain a qualified non-contributory profit sharing plan and
qualified contributory retirement savings plans in which most
U.S. employees are eligible to participate. For a limited
number of our U.S. employees and for some of our
international employees, we maintain defined benefit pension
plans. Under current accounting standards, we are required to
make assumptions regarding the valuation of projected benefit
obligations and the performance of plan assets for our defined
benefit pension plans.
The projected benefit obligation and the net periodic benefit
cost are based on third-party actuarial assumptions and
estimates that are reviewed and approved by management on a
plan-by-plan
basis each fiscal year. The principal assumptions concern the
discount rate used to measure the projected benefit obligation,
the expected future rate of return on plan assets and the
expected rate of future compensation increases. We revise these
51
assumptions based on an annual evaluation of long-term trends
and market conditions that may have an impact on the cost of
providing retirement benefits.
In determining the discount rate, we utilize market conditions
and other data sources management considers reasonable based
upon the profile of the remaining service life of eligible
employees. The expected long-term rate of return on plan assets
is determined by taking into consideration the weighted-average
expected return on our asset allocation, asset return data,
historical return data, and the economic environment. We believe
these considerations provide the basis for reasonable
assumptions of the expected long-term rate of return on plan
assets. The rate of compensation increase is based on our
long-term plans for such increases. The measurement date used to
determine the benefit obligation and plan assets is
December 31.
At December 31, 2010, the projected benefit obligation for
our U.S. pension plans was $55 million, and the net
periodic benefit cost for the year ended December 31, 2010
was $3 million. At December 31, 2010, the projected
benefit obligation for our international pension plans was
$286 million, and the net periodic benefit cost for the
year ended December 31, 2010 was $16 million.
In general, material changes to the principal assumptions could
have a material impact on the costs and liabilities recognized
on our consolidated financial statements. A 25 basis point
change in the assumed discount rate and a 100 basis point
change in the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets
would have resulted in the following increases (decreases) in
the projected benefit obligation at December 31, 2010 and
the expected net periodic benefit cost for the year ended
December 31, 2011 (in millions).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 Basis
|
|
|
25 Basis
|
|
|
|
Point
|
|
|
Point
|
|
United States
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Decrease
|
|
|
Discount Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on 2010 projected benefit obligation
|
|
$
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
Effect on 2011 expected net periodic benefit cost
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 Basis
|
|
|
100 Basis
|
|
|
|
Point
|
|
|
Point
|
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Decrease
|
|
|
Return on Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on 2011 expected net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 Basis
|
|
|
25 Basis
|
|
|
|
Point
|
|
|
Point
|
|
International
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Decrease
|
|
|
Discount Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on 2010 projected benefit obligation
|
|
$
|
(8.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
9.3
|
|
Effect on 2011 expected net periodic benefit cost
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 Basis
|
|
|
100 Basis
|
|
|
|
Point
|
|
|
Point
|
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Decrease
|
|
|
Return on Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on 2011 expected net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
2.2
|
|
Income
Taxes
Estimates and judgments are required in the calculation of tax
liabilities and in the determination of the recoverability of
our deferred tax assets. Our deferred tax assets arise from net
deductible temporary differences and tax benefit carry forwards.
We evaluate whether our taxable earnings during the periods when
the temporary differences giving rise to deferred tax assets
become deductible or when tax benefit carry forwards may be
utilized should be sufficient to realize the related future
income tax benefits. For those jurisdictions where the
expiration dates of tax benefit carry forwards or the projected
taxable earnings indicate that realization is not likely, we
provide a valuation allowance.
52
In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, we estimate
future taxable earnings, with consideration for the feasibility
of ongoing tax planning strategies and the realizability of tax
benefit carry forwards and past operating results, to determine
which deferred tax assets are more likely than not to be
realized in the future. Changes to tax laws, statutory tax rates
and future taxable earnings can have an impact on valuation
allowances related to deferred tax assets. In the event that
actual results differ from these estimates in future periods, we
may need to adjust the valuation allowance, which could have a
material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In calculating our worldwide provision for income taxes, we also
evaluate our tax positions for years where the statutes of
limitations have not expired. Based on this review, we may
establish reserves for additional taxes and interest that could
be assessed upon examination by relevant tax authorities. We
adjust these reserves to take into account changing facts and
circumstances, including the results of tax audits and changes
in tax law. If the payment of additional taxes and interest
ultimately proves unnecessary or less than the amount of the
reserve, the reversal of the reserves would result in tax
benefits being recognized in the period when we determine the
reserves are no longer necessary. If an estimate of tax reserves
proves to be less than the ultimate assessment, a further charge
to income tax provision would result. These adjustments to
reserves and related expenses could materially affect our
consolidated financial statements.
We recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only
if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be
sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the
technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in
the consolidated financial statements from such positions are
measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than
fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon settlement with
tax authorities. See Note 15, Income Taxes, for
further discussion.
Summarized
Quarterly Financial Information (Unaudited, in millions, except
share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
Second
|
|
Third
|
|
Fourth
|
2010
|
|
Quarter
|
|
Quarter
|
|
Quarter
|
|
Quarter
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
1,061.2
|
|
|
$
|
1,089.7
|
|
|
$
|
1,130.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,209.2
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
300.0
|
|
|
|
300.5
|
|
|
|
320.5
|
|
|
|
331.8
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
61.2
|
|
|
|
67.0
|
|
|
|
76.5
|
|
|
|
51.3
|
|
Basic net earnings per common share
|
|
$
|
0.38
|
|
|
$
|
0.42
|
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
Diluted net earnings per common share
|
|
$
|
0.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.38
|
|
|
$
|
0.43
|
|
|
$
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
Second
|
|
Third
|
|
Fourth
|
2009
|
|
Quarter
|
|
Quarter
|
|
Quarter
|
|
Quarter
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
988.5
|
|
|
$
|
1,028.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,079.9
|
|
|
$
|
1,146.4
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
285.7
|
|
|
|
288.1
|
|
|
|
311.1
|
|
|
|
333.6
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
58.1
|
|
|
|
60.5
|
|
|
|
60.6
|
|
|
|
65.1
|
|
Basic net earnings per common share
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
$
|
0.38
|
|
|
$
|
0.38
|
|
|
$
|
0.41
|
|
Diluted net earnings per common share
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
|
$
|
0.33
|
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
We are exposed to market risk from changes in the conditions in
the global financial markets, interest rates, foreign currency
exchange rates and commodity prices and the creditworthiness of
our customers and suppliers, which may adversely affect our
consolidated financial position and results of operations. We
seek to minimize these risks through regular operating and
financing activities and, when deemed appropriate, through the
use of derivative financial instruments. We do not purchase,
hold or sell derivative financial instruments for trading
purposes.
Interest
Rates
From time to time, we may use interest rate swaps, collars or
options to manage our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates.
At December 31, 2010, we had outstanding interest rate
swaps, but no outstanding collars or options.
53
The information set forth in Item 8 of Part II of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
in Note 12, Derivatives and Hedging Activities,
under the caption Interest Rate Swaps is
incorporated herein by reference.
See Note 13, Fair Value Measurements and Other
Financial Instruments, for details of the methodology and
inputs used to determine the fair value of our fixed rate debt.
The fair value of our fixed rate debt varies with changes in
interest rates. Generally, the fair value of fixed rate debt
will increase as interest rates fall and decrease as interest
rates rise. A hypothetical 10% decrease in interest rates would
result in an increase of $57 million in the fair value of
the total debt balance at December 31, 2010. These changes
in the fair value of our fixed rate debt do not alter our
obligations to repay the outstanding principal amount or any
related interest of such debt.
Foreign
Exchange Rates
Operations
As a large global organization, we face exposure to changes in
foreign currency exchange rates. These exposures may change over
time as business practices evolve and could materially impact
our consolidated financial position or results of operations in
the future. See Item 7, Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, above for the impacts foreign currency
translation had on our operations.
Venezuela
Economic events in Venezuela have exposed us to heightened
levels of foreign currency exchange risk.
Effective January 1, 2010, Venezuela was designated a
highly inflationary economy under U.S. GAAP, and the
U.S. dollar replaced the bolivar fuerte as the functional
currency for our subsidiary in Venezuela. Accordingly, all
bolivar-denominated monetary assets and liabilities were
re-measured into U.S. dollars using the current exchange
rate available to us, and any changes in the exchange rate were
reflected in foreign currency exchange gains and losses related
to our Venezuelan subsidiary on the consolidated statement of
operations. Also, in January 2010, the Venezuelan government
devalued the bolivar by resetting the official exchange rate
from 2.15 bolivars per U.S. dollar to 4.3 bolivars per
U.S. dollar for non-essential transactions and 2.60
bolivars per U.S. dollar for essential transactions.
On January 1, 2010 we did not have access or permission to
use the official exchange rate. Accordingly, for the majority of
our transactions, we accessed the parallel foreign currency
exchange market (which was a rate of 5.95 bolivars per
U.S. dollar at December 31, 2009) that was
available to entities that did not have access to the official
exchange rate. Since we did not have access to the official
exchange rate, we translated our Venezuelan subsidiarys
balance sheet using the parallel rate at December 31, 2009.
In May 2010, the Venezuelan government closed the parallel
foreign currency exchange market and in June 2010 replaced it
with a new foreign currency exchange system, the Transaction
System in Securities in Foreign Currency (SITME).
The Central Bank of Venezuela began accepting and approving
applications, under certain conditions, for non government
operated Foreign Exchange Administrative Board
(CADIVI) exchange transactions at the
weighted-average implicit exchange rate obtained from the SITME.
Effective June 9, 2010, the SITME weighted average implicit
exchange rate was 5.3 bolivars per U.S dollar. We did not access
the SITME during 2010.
From time to time during 2010 our access to the official
exchange rate was restricted. However, as of December 31,
2010, we had access to the CADIVI in Venezuela. Therefore, as of
December 31, 2010, we re-measured the net
bolivar-denominated monetary assets of approximately
$16 million (consisting primarily of cash and cash
equivalents) of our Venezuelan subsidiary using the official
exchange rate of 4.3 bolivars per U.S. dollar. At
December 31, 2010, our Venezuelan subsidiary had a negative
cumulative translation adjustment balance of approximately
$46 million. During 2010, we settled transactions at the
applicable official exchange rates.
As a result of the changes in the exchange rates upon settlement
of bolivar-denominated transactions and upon the remeasurement
of our Venezuelan subsidiarys financial statements, we
recognized net gains of $6 million for the year ended
December 31, 2010.
54
For the year ended December 31, 2010, less than 1% of our
consolidated net sales were derived from our business in
Venezuela and approximately 2% of our consolidated operating
profit was derived from our business in Venezuela.
Effective January 1, 2011, the Venezuelan government
devalued the bolivar by eliminating the non-essential exchange
rate of 2.60 bolivars per U.S. dollar. Therefore, there are
now only two legal exchange rates available. This includes the
CADIVI non-essential rate of 4.3 bolivars per U.S. dollar
and the SITME rate of 5.3 bolivars per U.S. dollar.
The potential future impact to our consolidated financial
position and results of operations for future
bolivar-denominated transactions will depend on our access to
U.S. dollars and on the exchange rates in effect when we
enter into, remeasure and settle transactions. Therefore, it is
difficult to predict the future impact until each transaction
settles at its applicable exchange rate or gets remeasured into
U.S. dollars.
Foreign
Currency Forward Contracts
We use foreign currency forward contracts to fix the amounts
payable or receivable on some transactions denominated in
foreign currencies. A hypothetical 10% adverse change in foreign
exchange rates at December 31, 2010 would have caused us to
pay approximately $24 million to terminate these contracts.
Our foreign currency forward contracts are described in
Note 12, Derivatives and Hedging Activities,
which is contained in Part II, Item 8, and in
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Liquidity and
Capital Resources Derivative Financial
Instruments Foreign Currency Forward
Contracts, contained in Part II, Item 7 of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
which information is incorporated herein by reference.
We may use other derivative instruments from time to time, such
as foreign exchange options to manage exposure to changes in
foreign exchange rates and interest rate and currency swaps
related to certain financing transactions. These instruments can
potentially limit foreign exchange exposure and limit or adjust
interest rate exposure by swapping borrowings denominated in one
currency for borrowings denominated in another currency. At
December 31, 2010, we had no foreign exchange options or
interest rate and currency swap agreements outstanding.
Outstanding
Debt
Our outstanding debt is generally denominated in the functional
currency of the borrower. We believe that this enables us to
better match operating cash flows with debt service requirements
and to better match the currency of assets and liabilities. The
amount of outstanding debt denominated in a functional currency
other than the U.S. dollar was $26 million at
December 31, 2010 and $109 million at
December 31, 2009.
Customer
Credit
We are exposed to credit risk from our customers. In the normal
course of business we extend credit to our customers if they
satisfy pre-defined credit criteria. We maintain an allowance
for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the
failure of our customers to make required payments. An
additional allowance may be required if the financial condition
of our customers deteriorates. The allowance for doubtful
accounts is maintained at a level that management assesses to be
appropriate to absorb estimated losses in the accounts
receivable portfolio.
Our customers may default on their obligations to us due to
bankruptcy, lack of liquidity, operational failure or other
reasons. Our provision for bad debt expense was $7 million
in 2010, $6 million in 2009 and $9 million in 2008.
The allowance for doubtful accounts was $17 million at
December 31, 2010 and $18 million at December 31,
2009.
Pensions
Recent market conditions have resulted in an unusually high
degree of volatility and increased risks and short-term
liquidity concerns associated with some of the plan assets held
by our defined benefit pension plans, which have impacted the
performance of some of the plan assets. Based upon the annual
valuation of our defined benefit
55
pension plans at December 31, 2010, we expect our net
periodic benefit costs to be approximately $14 million in
2011. See Note 14, Profit Sharing, Retirement Savings
Plans and Defined Benefit Pension Plans, for further
details on our defined benefit pension plans.
Commodities
We use various commodity raw materials such as plastic resins
and energy products such as electric power and natural gas in
conjunction with our manufacturing processes. Generally, we
acquire these components at market prices in the region in which
they will be used and do not use financial instruments to hedge
commodity prices. Moreover, we seek to maintain appropriate
levels of commodity raw material inventories thus minimizing the
expense and risks of carrying excess inventories. We do not
typically purchase substantial quantities in advance of
production requirements. As a result, we are exposed to market
risks related to changes in commodity prices of these components.
56
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
The following consolidated financial statements and notes are
filed as part of this report.
Sealed
Air Corporation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
Financial Statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
Financial Statement Schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
127
|
|
57
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Sealed Air Corporation:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Sealed Air Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31,
2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders equity, cash flows and
comprehensive income for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 2010. In connection with our
audits of the consolidated financial statements, we also have
audited financial statement schedule II
valuation and qualifying accounts and reserves. We also have
audited Sealed Air Corporations internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on
criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Sealed Air
Corporations management is responsible for these
consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over
financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting, included in the
accompanying Managements Annual Report on Internal Control
over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these consolidated financial statements and financial
statement schedule, and an opinion on the Companys
internal control over financial reporting 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 audits to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement and whether effective internal
control over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audits of the consolidated financial statements
included 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, and evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial
reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a
material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the
assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinions.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred
to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of Sealed Air Corporation and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also in
our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when
considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial
statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material
respects, the information set forth therein. Also in our
opinion, Sealed Air Corporation maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
Short Hills, New Jersey
February 25, 2011
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except share data)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
675.6
|
|
|
$
|
694.5
|
|
Receivables, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $17.0 in
2010 and $17.5 in 2009
|
|
|
697.1
|
|
|
|
666.7
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
495.8
|
|
|
|
469.4
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
146.2
|
|
|
|
176.1
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
25.3
|
|
|
|
66.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
2,040.0
|
|
|
|
2,073.4
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
948.3
|
|
|
|
1,010.7
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
1,945.9
|
|
|
|
1,948.7
|
|
Non-current deferred tax assets
|
|
|
179.6
|
|
|
|
146.0
|
|
Other assets, net
|
|
|
285.6
|
|
|
|
241.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
5,399.4
|
|
|
$
|
5,420.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
23.5
|
|
|
$
|
28.2
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
232.0
|
|
|
|
214.2
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
Settlement agreement and related accrued interest
|
|
|
787.9
|
|
|
|
746.8
|
|
Accrued restructuring costs
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
15.8
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
384.9
|
|
|
|
414.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
1,447.7
|
|
|
|
1,433.8
|
|
Long-term debt, less current portion
|
|
|
1,399.2
|
|
|
|
1,626.3
|
|
Non-current deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
142.9
|
|
|
|
153.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
2,997.8
|
|
|
|
3,219.8
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.10 par value per share,
50,000,000 shares authorized; no shares issued in 2010 and
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.10 par value per share,
400,000,000 shares authorized; shares issued: 169,272,636
in 2010 and 168,749,681 in 2009; shares outstanding; 159,305,507
in 2010 and 158,938,174 in 2009
|
|
|
17.0
|
|
|
|
16.9
|
|
Common stock reserved for issuance related to Settlement
agreement, $0.10 par value per share,
18,000,000 shares in 2010 and 2009
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
1,152.7
|
|
|
|
1,127.1
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
1,706.1
|
|
|
|
1,531.1
|
|
Common stock in treasury, 9,967,129 shares in 2010 and
9,811,507 shares in 2009
|
|
|
(362.7
|
)
|
|
|
(364.6
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of taxes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized pension items
|
|
|
(47.9
|
)
|
|
|
(70.4
|
)
|
Cumulative translation adjustment
|
|
|
(65.9
|
)
|
|
|
(50.8
|
)
|
Unrealized gain on derivative instruments
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Unrealized gain on
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of taxes
|
|
|
(110.3
|
)
|
|
|
(112.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total parent company stockholders equity
|
|
|
2,404.6
|
|
|
|
2,199.6
|
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
2,401.6
|
|
|
|
2,200.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
5,399.4
|
|
|
$
|
5,420.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
59
SEALED
AIR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
Net sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Food Packaging
|
|
$
|
1,923.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,839.8
|
|
|
$
|
1,969.4
|
|
Food Solutions
|
|
|
934.9
|
|
|
|
891.7
|
|
|
|
988.3
|
|
Protective Packaging
|
|
|
1,299.4
|
|
|
|
1,192.9
|
|
|
|
1,480.3
|
|
Other
|
|
|
332.2
|
|
|
|
318.4
|
|
|
|
405.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net sales
|
|
|
4,490.1
|
|
|
|
4,242.8
|
|
|
|
4,843.5
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
|
3,237.3
|
|
|
|
3,024.3
|
|
|
|
3,606.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
1,252.8
|
|
|
|
1,218.5
|
|
|
|
1,236.6
|
|
Marketing, administrative and development expenses
|
|
|
710.2
|
|
|
|
719.2
|
|
|
|
755.0
|
|
Restructuring and other charges
|
|
|
7.6
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
85.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating profit
|
|
|
535.0
|
|
|
|
492.3
|
|
|
|
396.5
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(161.6
|
)
|
|
|
(154.9
|
)
|
|
|
(128.1
|
)
|
Net gains on sale
(other-than-temporary
impairment) of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
(34.0
|
)
|
Foreign currency exchange gains related to Venezuelan subsidiary
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on debt redemption
|
|
|
(38.5
|
)
|
|
|
(3.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other expense, net
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(12.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings before income tax provision
|
|
|
343.4
|
|
|
|
329.9
|
|
|
|
222.3
|
|
Income tax provision
|
|
|
87.5
|
|
|
|
85.6
|
|
|
|
42.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings available to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
255.9
|
|
|
$
|
244.3
|
|
|
$
|
179.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
1.61
|
|
|
$
|
1.54
|
|
|
$
|
1.13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
1.44
|
|
|
$
|
1.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends per common share
|
|
$
|
0.50
|
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
158.3
|
|
|
|
157.2
|
|
|
|
157.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
176.7
|
|
|
|
182.6
|
|
|
|
188.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserved
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Issuance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Total Parent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related to the
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Company
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Settlement
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
Controlling
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Agreement
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Stock in Treasury
|
|
|
Loss, Net of Taxes
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Interests
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
16.8
|
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
|
$
|
1,086.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,260.8
|
|
|
$
|
(286.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(59.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,019.6
|
|
|
$
|
5.8
|
|
|
$
|
2,025.4
|
|
Effect of contingent stock transactions, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.9
|
|
Stock issued for share-based incentive compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Purchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(95.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(95.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(95.1
|
)
|
Recognition of deferred pension items, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(118.4
|
)
|
|
|
(118.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(118.4
|
)
|
Unrecognized loss on derivative instruments, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
Unrecognized gains on
available-for-sale
securities, net of taxes, reclassified to net earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.8
|
)
|
|
|
(4.8
|
)
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179.9
|
|
Dividends on common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(76.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(76.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(76.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2008
|
|
$
|
16.8
|
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
|
$
|
1,102.5
|
|
|
$
|
1,364.3
|
|
|
$
|
(383.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(177.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,924.6
|
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,925.6
|
|
Effect of contingent stock transactions, net
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37.0
|
|
Stock issued for share-based incentive compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
Recognition of deferred pension items, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10.2
|
)
|
|
|
(10.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10.2
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71.6
|
|
|
|
71.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71.6
|
|
Unrecognized loss on derivative instruments, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
Unrecognized gains on
available-for-sale
securities, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
244.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
244.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
244.3
|
|
Dividends on common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
16.9
|
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
|
$
|
1,127.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,531.1
|
|
|
$
|
(364.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(112.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,199.6
|
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
|
$
|
2,200.3
|
|
Effect of contingent stock transactions, net
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27.2
|
|
Stock issued for share-based incentive compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
Purchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.8
|
)
|
Recognition of deferred pension items, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22.5
|
|
|
|
22.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22.5
|
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15.1
|
)
|
|
|
(15.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15.1
|
)
|
Unrecognized loss on derivative instruments, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
Unrecognized losses on
available-for-sale
securities, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
Noncontrolling interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
255.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
255.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
255.9
|
|
Dividends on common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(80.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(80.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(80.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
17.0
|
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
|
$
|
1,152.7
|
|
|
$
|
1,706.1
|
|
|
$
|
(362.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(110.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,404.6
|
|
|
$
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,401.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings available to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
255.9
|
|
|
$
|
244.3
|
|
|
$
|
179.9
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
154.7
|
|
|
|
154.5
|
|
|
|
155.0
|
|
Share-based incentive compensation
|
|
|
30.6
|
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
Amortization of senior debt related items and other
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
Loss on debt redemption
|
|
|
38.5
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Net gains on sale)
other-than-temporary
impairment of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
34.0
|
|
Provisions for bad debt
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
9.0
|
|
Provisions for inventory obsolescence
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
Deferred taxes, net
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
(16.6
|
)
|
|
|
(39.5
|
)
|
Net loss on sales of small product lines
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net gain on disposals of property and equipment and other
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects of
businesses acquired:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables, net
|
|
|
(33.9
|
)
|
|
|
115.2
|
|
|
|
(40.3
|
)
|
Accounts receivable securitization program
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(80.0
|
)
|
|
|
80.0
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(19.4
|
)
|
|
|
109.7
|
|
|
|
(31.1
|
)
|
Other assets, net
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
(53.0
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
|
(68.4
|
)
|
|
|
(28.8
|
)
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
21.2
|
|
|
|
25.9
|
|
|
|
114.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
483.1
|
|
|
|
552.0
|
|
|
|
404.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures for property and equipment
|
|
|
(87.6
|
)
|
|
|
(80.3
|
)
|
|
|
(180.7
|
)
|
Businesses acquired in purchase transactions, net of cash and
cash equivalents acquired and equity investment in 2010
|
|
|
(24.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
Proceeds from sale of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of property and equipment
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
Other investing activities
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(96.9
|
)
|
|
|
(70.3
|
)
|
|
|
(176.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
|
|
(276.1
|
)
|
|
|
(585.3
|
)
|
|
|
(395.7
|
)
|
Proceeds from long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
766.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid on common stock
|
|
|
(79.7
|
)
|
|
|
(75.7
|
)
|
|
|
(76.4
|
)
|
Net (payments of) proceeds from short-term borrowings
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
(8.3
|
)
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
Payments of debt issuance costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7.0
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
(9.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(95.1
|
)
|
Other financing activities
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
|
(373.0
|
)
|
|
|
90.3
|
|
|
|
(562.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of foreign currency exchange rate changes on cash and
cash equivalents
|
|
|
(32.1
|
)
|
|
|
(6.4
|
)
|
|
|
33.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period
|
|
$
|
694.5
|
|
|
$
|
128.9
|
|
|
$
|
430.3
|
|
Net change during the period
|
|
|
(18.9
|
)
|
|
|
565.6
|
|
|
|
(301.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period
|
|
$
|
675.6
|
|
|
$
|
694.5
|
|
|
$
|
128.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest payments, net of amounts capitalized
|
|
$
|
128.7
|
|
|
$
|
100.9
|
|
|
$
|
95.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax payments
|
|
$
|
86.6
|
|
|
$
|
114.3
|
|
|
$
|
90.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash items:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized (losses) gains on
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
$
|
(7.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
7.0
|
|
|
$
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers of shares of our common stock from Treasury as part of
our 2009 and 2008 profit-sharing plan contributions
|
|
$
|
7.2
|
|
|
$
|
5.9
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net earnings available to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
255.9
|
|
|
$
|
244.3
|
|
|
$
|
179.9
|
|
Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognition of deferred pension items, net of income taxes of
$(1.8) in 2010, $3.6 in 2009 and $9.3 in 2008
|
|
|
22.5
|
|
|
|
(10.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
Unrealized losses on derivative instruments, net of income taxes
of $0.4 in 2010, $0.5 in 2009 and 2008
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
Unrealized (losses) gains on
available-for-sale
securities, reclassified to net earnings, net of taxes of $(2.6)
in 2010, $2.6 in 2009 and $1.5 in 2008
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
(15.1
|
)
|
|
|
71.6
|
|
|
|
(118.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income, net of income taxes
|
|
$
|
258.3
|
|
|
$
|
309.2
|
|
|
$
|
61.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
63
SEALED
AIR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(Amounts
in tables in millions, except share and per share
data)
|
|
Note 1
|
Organization
and Nature of Operations
|
We are a leading global innovator and manufacturer of a wide
range of packaging and performance-based materials and equipment
systems that serve an array of food, industrial, medical and
consumer applications.
We conduct substantially all of our business through two direct
wholly-owned subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air
Corporation (US). These two subsidiaries, directly and
indirectly, own substantially all of the assets of the business
and conduct operations themselves and through subsidiaries
around the world. We adopted this corporate structure in
connection with the Cryovac transaction. See Cryovac
Transaction Commitments and Contingencies, of
Note 16, Commitments and Contingencies, for a
description of the Cryovac transaction and related terms used in
these Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
|
Note 2
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies and Recently Issued
Accounting Standards
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of
Presentation
Our consolidated financial statements include all of the
accounts of the Company and our subsidiaries. We have eliminated
all significant intercompany transactions and balances in
consolidation. All amounts are in millions, except per share
amounts, and approximate due to rounding. Some prior period
amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year
presentation. These reclassifications, individually and in the
aggregate, had no impact on our consolidated financial position,
results of operations and cash flows.
Use of
Estimates
The preparation of our consolidated financial statements and
related disclosures in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires
our management to make estimates and assumptions that