We make forward-looking statements on this website and in other materials we file with the SEC or otherwise make public. In addition, our senior management might make forward-looking statements orally to analysts, investors, the media and others. Statement concerning our future operations, prospects, strategies, financial condition, future economic performance (including growth and earnings) and demand for our products and services, and other statements of our plans, beliefs, or expectations, are forward-looking statements. In some cases these statements are identifiable through the use of words such as "anticipate," "believe," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "plan," "project," "target," "can," "could," "may," "should," "will," "would" and similar expressions. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements we make are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to various assumptions, risks, and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those suggested by these forward-looking statements. These factors include those set forth below and in the any documents that we make public, including the documents that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. There also are other factors that we may not describe, generally because we currently do not perceive them to be material that could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations.
We expressly disclaim any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
An investment in our common stock or other securities involves a number of risks. You should carefully consider each of the risks described below before deciding to invest in our common stock. If any of the following risks develops into actual events, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be negatively affected, the market price of our common stock or other securities could decline and you may lose all or part of your investment.
Our Cash Flows Are Dependent Upon the Cash Flows Received on the Receivables Underlying Our Securitizations and From Our Other Credit Products.
The collectibility of the receivables underlying our securitizations and those that we hold and do not securitize is a function of many factors including the criteria used to select who is issued credit, the pricing of the credit products, the lengths of the relationships, general economic conditions, the rate at which customers repay their accounts or become delinquent and the rate at which cardholders use their cards. To the extent we have over estimated collectibility, in all likelihood we have over estimated our financial performance. Some of these concerns are discussed more fully below.
We may not successfully evaluate the creditworthiness of our customers and may not price our credit products so as to remain profitable. The creditworthiness of our target market generally is considered "sub-prime" based on guidance issued by the agencies that regulate the banking industry. Thus, our customers generally have a higher frequency of delinquencies, higher risk of nonpayment and, ultimately, higher credit losses than consumers who are served by more traditional providers of consumer credit. Some of the consumers included in our target market are consumers who are dependent upon finance companies, consumers with only retail store credit cards and/or lacking general purpose credit cards, consumers who are establishing or expanding their credit and consumers who may have had a delinquency, a default or, in some instances, a bankruptcy in their credit histories, but have, in our view, demonstrated recovery. We price our credit products taking into account the perceived risk level of our target customers. If our estimates are incorrect, customer default rates will be higher, we will receive less cash from our securitizations and other credit products, which will result in a decrease in the value of our retained interests (which are based on expected future cash flows) and our loans receivable, and we will experience reduced levels of net income.
An economic slowdown could increase credit losses and/or decrease our growth. Because our business is directly related to consumer spending, any period of economic slowdown or recession could make it more difficult for us to add or retain accounts or account balances. In addition, during periods of economic slowdown or recession, we expect to experience an increase in rates of delinquencies and frequency and severity of credit losses. Our actual rates of delinquencies and frequency and severity of credit losses may be higher under adverse economic conditions than those experienced in the consumer finance industry generally because of our focus on the sub-prime market. Changes in credit use, payment patterns and the rate of defaults by account holders may result from a variety of unpredictable social, economic and geographic factors. Social factors include, among other things, changes in consumer confidence levels, the public's perception of the use of credit and changing attitudes about incurring debt and the stigma of personal bankruptcy. Economic factors include, among other things, the rates of inflation, the unemployment rates and the relative interest rates offered for various types of loans. Moreover, adverse changes in economic conditions in states where account holders are located, including as a result of severe weather, could have a direct impact on the timing and amount of payments on our credit card accounts.
Because a significant portion of our reported income is based on management's estimates of the future performance of securitized receivables, differences between actual and expected performance of the receivables may cause fluctuations in net income. Income from the sale of receivables in securitization transactions and income from retained interests in receivables securitized have constituted, and are likely to continue to constitute, a significant portion of our income. Portions of this income are based on management's estimates of cash flows we expect to receive from the interests that we retain when we securitize receivables. Differences between actual and expected performance of the receivables will occur and may cause fluctuations in our net income. The expected cash flows are based on management's estimates of interest rates, default rates, payment rates, cardholder purchases, costs of funds paid to investors in the securitizations, servicing costs, discount rates and required amortization payments. These estimates are based on a variety of factors, many of which are not within our control. As a result, these estimates will differ from actual performance.
Increases in expected losses and delinquencies may prevent us from continuing to securitize receivables in the future on similar terms or otherwise obtaining favorable financing for non-securitized receivables. Greater than expected delinquencies and losses also could impact our ability to complete other securitization or financing transactions on acceptable terms or at all, thereby decreasing our liquidity and forcing us to either decrease or stop our growth or rely on alternative, and potentially more expensive, funding sources if even available.
Increased utilization of existing credit lines by cardholders would require us to establish additional securitization and financing facilities or curtail credit lines. Our existing commitments to extend credit to cardholders exceed our available securitization and financing facilities. If all of our cardholders were to use their entire lines of credit at the same time, we would not have sufficient capacity to fund card use. However, in that event, we could either reduce our cardholders' available credit lines or establish additional securitization and financing facilities. This would subject us to several of the other risks that we have described in this section.
Increases beyond expected losses and delinquencies may cause us to incur losses on our retained interests and losses on our loans and fees receivable. If the actual amounts of delinquencies and losses that occur in our securitized receivables or our on-balance-sheet receivables are greater than expected, the value of our retained interests in the securitization transactions and our loans and fee receivable, net on our consolidated balance sheet will decrease. Since we derive substantial income from our retained interests and loans and fees receivables, higher than expected rates of delinquency and loss could cause our net income to be lower than expected. In addition, under the terms of our securitizations agreements, levels of loss and delinquency could result in us being required to repay our securitization investors earlier than expected, reducing funds available to us for future growth. Similarly with respect to financing agreements secured by our on-balance-sheet receivables, levels of loss and delinquency could result in our being required to repay our lenders earlier than expected, thereby reducing funds available to us for future growth.
Our portfolio of receivables is not diversified and originates from customers whose creditworthiness is considered sub-prime. We obtain the receivables that we securitize and retain on our balance sheet in one of two ways-we either originate the receivables or purchase pools of receivables from other issuers. In either case, substantially all of our receivables originate from sub-prime borrowers. Our reliance on sub-prime receivables has in the past (and may in the future) negatively impacted our performance. For example, in 2001, we suffered a substantial loss after we increased the discount rate that we use in valuing our retained interests to reflect the higher rate of return required by securitization investors in sub-prime markets. These losses might have been mitigated had our portfolios consisted of higher-grade receivables in addition to our sub-prime receivables. Because our portfolios are undiversified, negative market forces have the potential to cause a widespread adverse impact. We have no immediate plans to issue or acquire significant receivables that are higher in the credit spectrum.
Seasonal consumer spending may result in fluctuations in our net income. Our quarterly income may substantially fluctuate as a result of seasonal consumer spending. In particular, our credit card customers may charge more and carry higher balances during the year-end holiday season and during the late summer vacation and back-to-school period, resulting in corresponding increases in the receivables we manage and subsequently securitize or finance during those periods.
Increases in interest rates will increase our cost of funds and may reduce the payment performance of our customers. Increases in interest rates will increase our cost of funds, which could significantly affect our results of operations and financial condition. Our credit card accounts have variable interest rates. Significant increases in these variable interest rates may reduce the payment performance of our customers.
Due to the lack of historical experience with Internet customers, we may not be able to successfully target these customers or evaluate their creditworthiness. There is less historical experience with respect to the credit risk and performance of customers acquired over the Internet. As part of our growth strategy, we are expanding our origination of accounts over the Internet; however, we may not be able to successfully target and evaluate the creditworthiness of these potential customers. Therefore, we may encounter difficulties managing the expected delinquencies and losses and appropriately pricing our products.
We Are Substantially Dependent Upon Securitizations and Other Borrowed Funds to Fund the Receivables That We Originate or Purchase.
All of our securitization and financing facilities are of finite duration (and ultimately will need to be extended or replaced) and contain conditions that must be fulfilled in order for funding to be available. Although our primary credit card receivables securitization facility with Merrill Lynch alleviates for the foreseeable future our principal exposure to advance rate fluctuations, in the event that future advance rates (i.e., the percentage on a dollar of receivables that lenders will lend us) for securitizations our financing facilities are reduced, investors in securitizations or financing facilities lenders require a greater rate of return, we fail to meet the requirements for continued funding or securitizations and financing arrangements otherwise become unavailable to us, we may not be able to maintain or grow our base of receivables or it may be more expensive for us to do so. In addition, because of advance rate limitations, we retain subordinate interests in our securitizations, the "retained interests," that must be funded through profitable operations, equity raised from third parties or funds borrowed elsewhere. The cost and availability of equity and borrowed funds is dependent upon our financial performance, the performance of our industry generally and general economic and market conditions, and at times equity and borrowed funds have been both expensive and difficult to obtain. Some of these concerns are discussed more fully below.
Our growth is dependent on our ability to add new securitization and financing facilities. We finance our receivables through securitizations and financing facilities. To the extent we grow our receivables significantly, our cash requirements are likely to exceed the amount of cash we generate from operations, thus requiring us to add new securitization or financing facilities. Our historic and projected performance impact whether, on what terms and at what cost we can sell interests in our securitizations or obtain financing from lenders. If additional securitization and financing facilities are not available on terms we consider acceptable, or if existing securitization and financing facilities are not renewed on terms as favorable as we have now or are not renewed at all, we may not be able to grow.
As our securitization and financing facilities mature, they will be required to accumulate cash that therefore will not be available to us for reinvestment or other purposes. Repayment for our securitization facilities begins as early as one year prior to their maturity dates. Once repayment begins and until the facility is paid, payments from customers on receivables are accumulated to repay the investors and are no longer reinvested in new receivables. When a securitization facility matures, the underlying trust continues to own the receivables and effectively the maturing facility maintains its priority in its right to payments following collections on the underlying receivables until it is repaid in full. As a result, new purchases need to be funded using debt, equity or a replacement facility subordinate to the maturing facility's interest in the underlying receivables. Although this subordination historically has not made it more difficult to obtain replacement facilities, it may do so in the future. If our securitization facilities begin to accumulate cash and we also are unable to obtain additional sources of liquidity, such as debt, equity or new securitization facilities that are structurally subordinate to the facilities accumulating cash, we may be forced to prohibit new purchases in some or all of our accounts in order to significantly reduce our need for any additional cash.
The documents under which the securitization facilities are established provide that, upon the occurrence of certain adverse events known as early redemption events, the timing of payments to the investors could be accelerated. Early redemption events include portfolio performance triggers, the termination of the affinity agreement with CB&T, breach of certain representations, warranties and covenants, insolvency or receivership, servicer defaults, and may include the occurrence of an early redemption event with respect to another securitization transaction. In the Merrill Lynch facility, an early redemption event also may be triggered based on a total consolidated equity test or a change of control in CompuCredit. If an early redemption event occurs, principal payments would be made to investors to reduce their interests in our securitizations. As investors' interests in our securitizations decrease, our liquidity would be negatively impacted and our financial results may suffer. We would need to obtain alternative sources of funding, and there is no certainty that we would be able to do so. Similar triggers exist with respect to the financing facilities for our loans and fees receivable retained on our balance sheet, the refunding of which could be made more difficult or impossible at terms acceptable to us if we hit such triggers.
We may be unable to obtain capital from third parties needed to fund our existing securitizations and loans and fees receivable or may be forced to rely on more expensive funding sources. We need equity or debt capital to fund our retained interests in our securitizations and the difference between our loans and fees receivable and the amount that lenders will advance or lend to us against those receivables. Investors should be aware of our dependence on third parties for funding and our exposure to increases in costs for that funding. External factors, including the general economy, impact our ability to obtain funds. For instance, in 2001, we needed additional liquidity to fund our operations and the growth in our retained interests, and we had a difficult time obtaining the needed cash. If in the future we need to raise cash by issuing additional debt or equity or by selling a portion of our retained interests, there is no certainty that we will be able to do so or that we will be able to do so on favorable terms. Our ability to raise cash will depend on factors such as our performance and creditworthiness, the performance of our industry, the performance of issuers of other non-credit card-based asset backed securities and the general economy.
The timing and volume of securitizations and originations with respect to our largely fee-based credit card offerings to consumers at the lower end of the FICO scoring range may cause significant fluctuations in quarterly income. Fluctuations in the timing or the volume of receivables securitized will cause fluctuations in our quarterly income. Factors that affect the timing or volume of our securitizations include the growth in our receivables, market conditions and the approval by all parties of the terms of the securitization. Given the significant and variable growth rates that we have experienced for our largely fee-based credit card offerings to consumers at the lower end of the FICO scoring range and given the appreciably shorter vintage life cycles for these offerings relative to our more traditional credit card offerings, we have experienced, and in the future expect to experience, significant volatility of quarterly earnings from these offerings based on the varying volumes of marketing spending and account origination in the quarters preceding peak vintage charge-off periods.
The performance of our competitors may impact the costs of our securitizations and financing facilities. Investors in our securitizations and financing facilities compare us to other sub-prime credit card issuers and, to some degree, our performance is tied to many of the factors that impact their performance. Generally speaking, investors in our securitizations also invest in our competitors' securitizations, and lenders against our receivables also lend against our competitors' receivables. These investors and lenders broadly invest in or lend against receivables, and when they evaluate their investments and lending arrangements, they typically do so on the basis of overall industry performance. Thus, when our competitors perform poorly, we typically experience negative investor and lender sentiment, and the investors in our securitizations and lenders against our receivables require greater returns, particularly with respect to subordinated interests in our securitizations. In 2001, for instance, investors demanded unprecedented returns.
We may be required to pay to investors in our securitizations an amount equal to the amount of securitized receivables if representations and warranties made to us by sellers of the receivables are inaccurate. The representations and warranties made to us by sellers of receivables we have purchased may be inaccurate. We rely on these representations and warranties when we securitize these purchased receivables. In securitization transactions, we make representations and warranties to investors and, generally speaking, if there is a breach of our representations and warranties, then under the terms of the applicable investment agreement we could be required to pay the investors the amount of the non-compliant receivables. Thus, our reliance on a representation or warranty of a receivables seller, which proves to be false and causes a breach of one of our representations or warranties, could subject us to a potentially costly liability.
Our Financial Performance Is, in Part, a Function of the Aggregate Amount of Receivables That Are Outstanding.
The aggregate amount of outstanding receivables is a function of many factors including purchase rates, payment rates, interest rates, seasonality, general economic conditions, competition from other credit card issuers and other sources of consumer financing, access to funding as noted above and the success of our marketing efforts. To the extent that we have over estimated the size or growth of our receivables, in all likelihood we have over estimated our future financial performance.
Intense competition for customers may cause us to lose receivables to competitors. We may lose receivables to competitors that offer lower interest rates and fees or other more attractive terms or features. We believe that customers choose credit card issuers and other lenders largely on the basis of interest rates, fees, credit limits and other product features. For this reason, customer loyalty is often limited. Our future growth depends largely upon the success of our marketing programs and strategies. Our credit card business competes with national, regional and local bank and other credit card issuers, including issuers of American Express®, Discover®, Visa® and MasterCard® credit cards. Our other businesses have substantial competitors as well. Some of these competitors already may use or may begin using many of the programs and strategies that we have used to attract new accounts. In addition, many of our competitors are substantially larger than we are and have greater financial resources. Further, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which permits the affiliation of commercial banks, insurance companies and securities firms, may increase the level of competition in the financial services market, including the credit card business.
We may be unable to sustain and manage our growth. We may experience fluctuations in net income or sustain net losses if we are not able to sustain or effectively manage our growth. Growth is a product of a combination of factors, many of which are not in our control. Factors include:
- growth in both existing and new receivables;
- the degree to which we lose receivables to competitors;
- levels of delinquencies and charge offs;
- the availability of funding, including securitizations, on favorable terms;
- our ability to sell retained interests on favorable terms;
- our ability to attract new customers through originations or portfolio purchases;
- the level of costs of soliciting new customers;
- the level of response to our solicitations;
- our ability to employ and train new personnel;
- our ability to maintain adequate management systems, collection procedures, internal controls and automated systems; and
- general economic and other factors beyond our control.
Our decisions regarding marketing can have a significant impact on our growth. We can increase or decrease the size of our outstanding receivables balances by increasing or decreasing our marketing efforts. Marketing is expensive, and during periods when we have less liquidity than we like or when prospects for continued liquidity in the future do not look promising, we may decide to limit our marketing and thereby our growth. We decreased our marketing during 2003, although we increased our marketing in 2004 through 2006 because of our improved access to capital.
Our operating expenses and our ability to effectively service our accounts are dependent on our ability to estimate the future size and general growth rate of the portfolio. One of our servicing agreements causes us to make additional payments if we overestimate the size or growth of our business. These additional payments compensate the servicer for increased staffing expenses it incurs in anticipation of our growth. If we grow more slowly than anticipated, we still may have higher servicing expenses than we actually need, thus reducing our net income.
Changes in bankruptcy, privacy or other consumer protection laws, or to the prevailing interpretation thereof, may expose us to litigation, adversely affect our ability to collect account balances in connection with our traditional credit card business, our debt collection subsidiary's charged-off receivables operations, auto finance and micro-loan activities, or otherwise adversely affect our operations. Similarly, regulatory changes could adversely affect our ability or willingness to market credit cards and other products and services to our customers. The accounting rules that govern our business are exceedingly complex, difficult to apply and in a state of flux. As a result, how we value our receivables and otherwise account for our business (including whether we consolidate our securitizations) is subject to change depending upon the interpretation of, and changes in, those rules. Some of these issues are discussed more fully below.
Reviews and enforcement actions by regulatory authorities under banking and consumer protection laws and regulations may result in changes to our business practices, may make collection of account balances more difficult or may expose us to the risk of fines, restitution and litigation. Our operations and the operations of the issuing banks through which we originate credit products are subject to the jurisdiction of federal, state and local government authorities, including the SEC, the FDIC, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the FTC, state regulators having jurisdiction over financial institutions and debt origination and collection and state attorneys general. Our business practices, including the terms of our products and our marketing, servicing and collection practices, are subject to both periodic and special reviews by these regulatory and enforcement authorities. These reviews can range from the investigations of specific consumer complaints or concerns to broader inquiries into our practices generally. If as part of these reviews the regulatory authorities conclude that we are not complying with applicable law, they could request or impose a wide range of remedies including requiring changes in advertising and collection practices, changes in the terms of our products (such as decreases in interest rates or fees), the imposition of fines or penalties, or the paying of restitution or the taking of other remedial action with respect to affected customers. They also could require us to stop offering some of our products, either nationally or in selected states. To the extent that these remedies are imposed on the issuing banks through which we originate credit products, we generally are responsible for the remedies as a result of our indemnification obligations with those banks. Furthermore, negative publicity relating to any specific inquiry or investigation could hurt our ability to conduct business with various industry participants or to attract new accounts and could negatively affect our stock price, which would adversely affect our ability to raise additional capital and raise our costs of doing business.
As discussed in more detail below, in March 2006, one of our subsidiaries stopped processing and servicing micro-loans in North Carolina in settlement of a review by the North Carolina Attorney General, and also in 2006, we terminated our processing and servicing of micro-loans for third-party banks in three other states in response to a position taken in February 2006 with respect to banks generally by the FDIC.
In June 2006, we entered into an assurance agreement with the New York Attorney General in order to resolve an inquiry into our marketing and other materials and our servicing and collection practices, principally as a result of New York Personal Property Law Section 413. Pursuant to this agreement, we agreed to pay a $0.5 million civil penalty to the State of New York and to refund certain fees to New York cardholders, which resulted in cash payments of under $2.0 million and a charge against a $5.0 million liability that we accrued for this purpose. In addition, we assured the New York Attorney General that we would not engage in certain marketing, billing, servicing and collection practices, a number of which we previously had discontinued.
Also in June 2006, the FDIC commenced an investigation of the policies, practices and procedures used in connection with our longest standing third-party credit card originating financial institution relationship. In December 2006, the FTC commenced a related investigation. In general, the investigations focus upon whether marketing and other materials contained misrepresentations regarding, among other things, fees and credit limits and whether servicing and collection practices were conducted in accordance with applicable law. We have provided substantial information to both the FDIC and FTC, and we continue to respond to their requests. The FDIC and FTC have proposed limitations on certain marketing, servicing and collection practices, reimbursement of various types of fees to affected customers and the payment of fines. The matters under investigation involve a significant amount of fees and a substantial number of accounts, and it is premature to determine the outcomes of these investigations or their effects on our financial condition, results of operations or business position and consolidated financial statements. However, we believe that our marketing and other materials and servicing and collection practices comply with applicable law, and we intend to vigorously contest the limitations and other proposals of the FDIC and FTC.
If any additional deficiencies or violations of law or regulations are identified by us or asserted by any regulator, or if the FDIC, FTC or any other regulator requires us to change any of our practices, there can be no assurance that the correction of such deficiencies or violations, or the making of such changes, would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or business. In addition, whether or not we modify our practices when a regulatory or enforcement authority requests or requires that we do so, there is a risk that we or other industry participants may be named as defendants in litigation involving alleged violations of federal and state laws and regulations, including consumer protection laws. Any failure to comply with legal requirements by us or the issuing banks through which we originate credit products in connection with the issuance of those products, or by us or our agents as the servicer of our accounts, could significantly impair our ability to collect the full amount of the account balances. The institution of any litigation of this nature, or any judgment against us or any other industry participant in any litigation of this nature, could adversely affect our business and financial condition in a variety of ways.
Increases in required minimum payment levels could impact our business adversely. Recently, regulators of credit card issuers have requested or required that issuers increase their minimum monthly payment requirements to prevent so-called "negative amortization," in which the monthly minimum payment is not sufficient to reduce the outstanding balance even if new purchases are not made. This can be caused by, among other things, the imposition of over-limit, late and other fees. We request a minimum payment from our credit cardholders equal to the greater of 3% or 4% (depending upon the credit card product) of their outstanding balance or an amount that is sufficient to cover over-limit, late and other fees -a minimum payment level that is designed to prevent negative amortization. However, we have followed a more consumer-friendly practice of not treating cardholders as delinquent (with commensurate adverse credit agency reporting) provided they make a minimum payment of only 3% or 4% (depending on the credit card product) of their outstanding balance (i.e., exclusive of the requested over-limit, late and other fees). Because of this practice, as of December 31, 2006, approximately 3.8% of our accounts (representing approximately 5.9% of our receivables) were experiencing negative amortization; this compares with 4.0% of accounts and 6.1% of our receivables experiencing negative amortization as of September 30, 2006 and 3.8% of accounts and 5.7% of our receivables experiencing negative amortization as of June 30, 2006. In response to comments about minimum payments and negative amortization received from the FDIC in the course of its routine examinations of the banks that issue credit cards on our behalf, during the second quarter of this year we began a review of our practices in this area. As a result of this review, commencing during the third and fourth quarters of 2006, we discontinued billing finance charges and fees on credit card accounts once they become over 90 days delinquent. In addition, we are reviewing alternative minimum payment, fee and other credit terms designed to prevent negative amortization. We have not, however, made any assessment of the impact of any changes on our business, although changes could adversely impact our delinquency and charge off statistics and the amounts ultimately collected from cardholders.
Adverse regulatory action with respect to issuing banks could adversely impact our business. It is possible that a regulatory position or action taken with respect to any of the issuing banks through which we originate credit products or for whom we service receivables, might result in the bank's inability or unwillingness to originate credit products on our behalf or in partnership with us. For instance, in February 2006 the FDIC effectively asked insured financial institutions not to issue cash advance and installment micro-loans through third-party servicers. As a result of this request, the issuing bank for which we provided services in four states stopped making new loans. In the future, regulators may find other aspects of the products that we originate or service objectionable, including, for instance, the terms of the credit offerings (particularly for our high fee products), the manner in which we market them or our servicing and collection practices. We are entirely dependent in our issuing relationships with these institutions, and their regulators could at any time limit their ability to issue some or all products on our behalf, or that we service on their behalf, or to modify those products significantly. Any significant interruption of those relationships would result in our being unable to originate new receivables and other credit products, which would have a materially adverse impact on our business.
Changes to consumer protection laws or changes in their interpretation may impede collection efforts or otherwise adversely impact our business practices. Federal and state consumer protection laws regulate the creation and enforcement of consumer credit card receivables and other loans. As an originator and servicer of sub-prime receivables, we typically charge higher interest rates and fees than lenders serving consumers with higher credit scores. Sub-prime lenders are commonly the target of legislation (and revised legislative interpretations) intended to prohibit or curtail these and other industry-standard practices as well as non-standard practices. For instance, Congress recently enacted legislation that regulates loans to military personnel through imposing interest rate and other limitations and requiring new disclosures, all as regulated by the Department of Defense. Among others, changes in the consumer protection laws could result in the following:
- receivables not originated in compliance with law (or revised interpretations) could become unenforceable and uncollectible under their terms against the obligors;
- we may be required to refund previously collected amounts;
- certain of our collection methods could be prohibited, forcing us to revise our practices or adopt more costly or less effective practices;
- federal and state laws may limit our ability to recover on charged-off receivables regardless of any act or omission on our part;
- reductions in statutory limits for fees and finance charges could cause us to reduce our fees and charges;
- some of our products and services could be banned in certain states or at the federal level; for example, in 2004 the State of Georgia made certain micro-loan practices illegal and regulatory action and litigation has been brought in North Carolina alleging that certain micro-loan practices are prohibited in that state;
- federal or state bankruptcy or debtor relief laws could offer additional protections to customers seeking bankruptcy protection, providing a court greater leeway to reduce or discharge amounts owed to us; and
- a reduction in our ability or willingness to lend to certain individuals, such as military personnel.
Accordingly, our business is always subject to changes in the regulatory environment. Changes or additions to the consumer protection laws and related regulations, or to the prevailing interpretations thereof, could invalidate or call into question a number of our existing products, services and business practices, including our credit card origination, charged-off receivable collection, auto finance and micro-loan activities. Any material regulatory developments could adversely impact our results from operations.
Changes in bankruptcy laws may have an adverse impact on our performance. Effective October 17, 2005, the federal bankruptcy code was amended in several respects. One of the changes made it substantially more difficult for individuals to obtain a complete release from their debts through a bankruptcy filing. As a result, immediately prior to the effective date of the amendments there was a substantial increase in bankruptcy filings by individuals. While much of the impact of this particular law change appears to have been simply to accelerate the bankruptcy filings by individuals who otherwise would have filed in due course and while this particular law may have ongoing future benefits to us through potential reductions in future bankruptcy filings, other future bankruptcy law changes could potentially have a materially adverse effect on our business.
The Retail Micro-Loans segment of our business operates in an increasingly hostile regulatory environment. Most states have specific laws regulating micro-loan activities and practices. (One form of these activities is sometimes referred to as "payday" lending.) Moreover, during the last few years, legislation has been adopted in some states that prohibits or severely restricts micro-loan cash advance services. For example, in 2004, a new law became effective in Georgia that effectively prohibits certain micro-loan practices in the state. Several other state legislatures have introduced bills to restrict or prohibit "cash advance" micro-loans by limiting the amount of the advance and or reducing the allowable fees. In addition, Mississippi and Arizona have sunset provisions in their laws permitting micro-loans that require renewal of the laws by the state legislatures at periodic intervals. Although states provide the primary regulatory framework under which we conduct our micro-loan services, certain federal laws also impact our business. In March 2005 the FDIC issued guidance limiting the frequency of borrower usage of cash advance micro-loans offered by FDIC-supervised institutions and the period a customer may have cash advance micro-loans outstanding from any lender to three months during the previous 12-month period. Subsequently, in February 2006, the FDIC effectively asked FDIC-insured financial institutions to cease cash advance and installment micro-loan activities conducted through a processing and servicing agent such as us. Moreover, future laws or regulations (at the state, federal or local level) prohibiting micro-loan services or making them unprofitable could be passed at any time or existing micro-loan laws could expire or be amended, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Additionally, state attorneys general, banking regulators and others continue to scrutinize the micro-loan industry and may take actions that could require us to cease or suspend operations in their respective states. For example, one of our subsidiaries agreed with the Attorney General of the State of North Carolina in March 2006 to stop servicing micro-loans for third-party banks, a practice that we also terminated in three other affected states based on the February 2006 FDIC action cited above. Also, a group of plaintiffs brought a series of putative class action lawsuits in North Carolina claiming, among other things, that the cash advance micro-loan activities of the defendants violate numerous North Carolina consumer protection laws. The lawsuits seek various remedies including treble damages. One of these lawsuits is pending against CompuCredit and five of our subsidiaries. If these cases are determined adversely to us, there could be significant consequences to us, including the payment of monetary damages. In the future, we also might voluntarily (or with the encouragement of a regulator) withdraw particular products from particular states, which could have a similar effect.
Negative publicity may impair acceptance of our products. Critics of sub-prime credit and micro-loan providers have in the past focused on marketing practices that they claim encourage consumers to borrow more money than they should, as well as on pricing practices that they claim are either confusing or result in prices that are too high. Consumer groups, Internet chat sites and media reports frequently characterize sub-prime lenders as predatory or abusive toward consumers and may misinform consumers regarding their rights. If these negative characterizations and misinformation become widely accepted by consumers, demand for our products and services could be adversely impacted. Increased criticism of the industry or criticism of us in the future could hurt customer acceptance of our products or lead to changes in the law or regulatory environment, either of which would significantly harm our business.
We Recently Entered Into and Have Subsequently Expanded Our Automobile Lending Activities, and These Activities Involve Risks in Addition to Those We Historically Have Faced.
In 2005, we acquired Wells Fargo Financial's CAR business unit. We are operating these assets in forty-five states through twelve branches, three regional processing centers and one national collection center based in Lake Mary, Florida under the name CAR Financial Services, Inc. On February 2, 2007, we acquired the business of ACC, also an automobile lender. Automobile lending is a new business for us, and we expect to expand further in this business over time. As a new business, we may not be able to integrate or manage the business effectively. In addition, automobile lending exposes us to a range of risks to which we previously have not been exposed, including the regulatory scheme that governs installment loans and those attendant to relying upon automobiles and their liquidation value as collateral. In addition, the CAR Financial Services business acquires loans on a wholesale basis from used car dealers, for which we will be relying upon the legal compliance and credit determinations by those dealers.
Our automobile lending business is dependent upon referrals from dealers. Currently we provide automobile loans only to or through new and used car dealers. Providers of automobile financing have traditionally competed based on the interest rate charged, the quality of credit accepted and the flexibility of loan terms offered. In order to be successful, we not only will need to be competitive in these areas, but also will need to establish and maintain good relations with dealers and provide them with a level of service greater than what they can obtain from our competitors. This is particularly true with our newly acquired ACC business, which stopped originating loans in November 2006 and is in the process of reestablishing its relationships with dealers.
The financial performance of our automobile loan portfolio is in part dependent upon the liquidation of repossessed automobiles. Our newly acquired ACC business regularly repossesses automobiles and sells repossessed automobiles at wholesale auction markets located throughout the United States. Auction proceeds from these sales and other recoveries rarely are sufficient to cover the outstanding balances of the contracts; where we experience these shortfalls, we will experience credit losses. Decreased auction proceeds resulting from depressed prices at which used automobiles may be sold in periods of economic slowdown or recession will result in higher credit losses for us. Furthermore, depressed prices for automobiles also may result from significant liquidations of rental fleet inventories and from increased volumes of trade-ins due to promotional programs offered by new vehicle manufacturers. Additionally, higher gasoline prices may decrease the auction value of certain types of vehicles, such as SUVs.
Repossession of Automobiles Entails the Risk of Litigation and Other Claims. Although we contract with reputable repossession firms to repossess automobiles on defaulted loans, it is not uncommon for consumers to assert that we were not entitled to repossess an automobile or that the repossession was not conducted in accordance with applicable law. These claims increase the cost of our collection efforts and, if correct, can result in awards against us.
We Routinely Explore Various Opportunities to Grow Our Business, to Make Investments and to Purchase and Sell Assets.
We routinely consider acquisitions of, or investments in, portfolios and other businesses as well as the sale of portfolios and portions of our business. There are a number of risks attendant to any acquisition, including the possibility that we will overvalue the assets to be purchased, that we will not be able to successfully integrate the acquired business or assets and that we will not be able to produce the expected level of profitability from the acquired business or assets. Similarly, there are a number of risks attendant to sales, including the possibility that we will undervalue the assets to be sold. As a result, the impact of any acquisition or sale on our future performance may not be as favorable as expected and actually may be adverse.
Portfolio purchases may cause fluctuations in reported credit card managed receivables data, which may reduce the usefulness of historical credit card managed loan data in evaluating our business. Our reported managed credit card receivables data may fluctuate substantially from quarter to quarter as a result of recent and future credit card portfolio acquisitions. As of December 31, 2006, credit card portfolio acquisitions account for 21.1% of our total credit card managed receivables portfolio based on our ownership percentages.
Receivables included in purchased portfolios are likely to have been originated using credit criteria different from our criteria. As a result, some of these receivables have a different credit quality than receivables we originated. Receivables included in any particular purchased portfolio may have significantly different delinquency rates and charge off rates than the receivables previously originated and purchased by us. These receivables also may earn different interest rates and fees as compared to other similar receivables in our receivables portfolio. These variables could cause our reported managed receivables data to fluctuate substantially in future periods making the evaluation of our business more difficult.
Any acquisition or investment that we make, will involve risks different from and in addition to the risks to which our business is currently exposed. These include the risks that we will not be able to successfully integrate and operate new businesses, that we will have to incur substantial indebtedness and increase our leverage in order to pay for the acquisitions, that we will be exposed to, and have to comply with, different regulatory regimes and that we will not be able to apply our traditional analytical framework (which is what we expect to be able to do) in a successful and value-enhancing manner.
We recently entered the automobile lending business. On April 1, 2005, we acquired Wells Fargo Financial's CAR business unit. We are operating these assets in forty-five states through twelve branches, three regional processing centers and one national collection center based in Lake Mary, Florida under the name CAR Financial Services, Inc. Automobile lending is a new business for us, and we expect to expand further in this business over time. As a new business, we may not be able to integrate or manage the business effectively. In addition, automobile lending exposes us to a range of risks to which we previously have not been exposed, including the regulatory scheme that governs installment loans and those attendant to relying upon automobiles and their liquidation value as collateral. In addition, this business acquires loans on a wholesale basis from used car dealers, for which we will be relying upon the legal compliance and credit determinations by those dealers.
Unless we obtain a bank charter, we cannot issue credit cards other than through agreements with banks. Because we do not have a bank charter, we currently cannot issue credit cards other than through agreements with banks. Previously we applied for permission to acquire a bank and our application was denied. Unless we obtain a bank or credit card bank charter, we will continue to rely upon banking relationships to provide for the issuance of credit cards to our customers. Even if we obtain a bank charter, there may be restrictions on the types of credit that it may extend. Our longest standing issuing agreement is with CB&T and is scheduled to expire on March 31, 2009. If we are unable to execute a new agreement with CB&T or our other issuing banks at the expirations of our current agreements with them, or if our existing or new agreements with our issuing banks were terminated or otherwise disrupted, there is a risk that we would not be able to enter into agreements with an alternate provider on terms that we consider favorable or in a timely manner without disruption of our business.
We may not be able to purchase charged-off receivables at sufficiently favorable prices or terms for our debt collection operations to be successful. The charged-off receivables that are acquired and serviced by Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC, our debt collection subsidiary, or sold to third parties pursuant to forward flow contracts have been deemed uncollectible and written off by the originators. Jefferson Capital seeks to purchase charged-off receivables portfolios only if it expects projected collections or prices received for sales of such charged-off receivables to exceed its acquisition and servicing costs. Accordingly, factors causing the acquisition price of targeted portfolios to increase could reduce the ratio of collections (or sales prices received) to acquisitions costs for a given portfolio, and thereby negatively affect Jefferson Capital's profitability. The availability of charged-off receivables portfolios at favorable prices and on favorable terms depends on a number of factors, including the continuation of the current growth and charge off trends in consumer receivables, our ability to develop and maintain long-term relationships with key charged-off receivable sellers, our ability to obtain adequate data to appropriately evaluate the collectibility of portfolios and competitive factors affecting potential purchasers and sellers of charged-off receivables, including pricing pressures, which may increase the cost to us of acquiring portfolios of charged-off receivables and reduce our return on such portfolios.
Additionally, sellers of charged-off receivables generally make numerous attempts to recover on their non-performing receivables, often using a combination of their in-house collection and legal departments as well as third-party collection agencies. Charged-off receivables are difficult to collect, and we may not be successful in collecting amounts sufficient to cover the costs associated with purchasing the receivables and funding our Jefferson Capital operations.
The analytical model we use to project credit quality may prove to be inaccurate. We assess credit quality using an analytical model that we believe predicts the likelihood of payment more accurately than traditional credit scoring models. For instance, we have identified factors (such as delinquencies, defaults and bankruptcies) that under some circumstances we weight differently than do other credit providers. We believe our analysis enables us to better identify consumers within the underserved market who are likely to be better credit risks than otherwise would be expected. Similarly, we apply our analytical model to entire portfolios in order to identify those that may be more valuable than the seller or other potential purchasers might recognize. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be able to achieve the collections forecasted by our analytical model. If any of our assumptions underlying our model proves materially inaccurate or changes unexpectedly, we may not be able to achieve our expected levels of collection, and our revenues will be reduced, which would result in a reduction of our earnings.
Because we outsource account-processing functions that are integral to our business, any disruption or termination of that outsourcing relationship could harm our business. We outsource account and payment processing pursuant to agreements with CB&T and its affiliates. In 2006, we paid CB&T and its affiliates $36.5 million for these services. If these agreements were not renewed or were terminated or the services provided to us otherwise disrupted, we would have to obtain these services from an alternative provider, such as First Data Resources, Inc., which currently provides only limited account and payment processing for us. There is a risk that we would not be able to enter into a similar agreement with an alternate provider on terms that we consider favorable or in a timely manner without disruption of our business.
We rely on Visionary Systems, Inc. for software design and support, and any disruption of our relationship with Visionary Systems could negatively impact our business. During 2005, we paid Visionary Systems $6.1 million for software development, account origination and consulting services. In the event that Visionary Systems no longer provides us with software and support, our business would be negatively impacted until we retained replacement vendors. We believe that a number of vendors are qualified to perform the services performed by Visionary Systems and believe that this impact would be only temporary.
If we obtain a bank charter, any changes in applicable state or federal laws could adversely affect our business. From time-to-time we have explored the possibility of acquiring a bank or credit card bank. If we obtain a bank or credit card bank charter, we will be subject to the various state and federal regulations generally applicable to similar institutions, including restrictions on the ability of the banking subsidiary to pay dividends to us. We are unable to predict the effect of any future changes of applicable state and federal laws or regulations, but such changes could adversely affect the bank's business and operations.
If we ever consolidate the entities that hold our receivables, the changes to our financial statements are likely to be significant. When we securitize receivables, they are owned by special purpose entities that are not consolidated with us for financial reporting purposes. The rules governing whether these entities are consolidated are complex and evolving. These rules at some point could be changed or interpreted in a manner that requires us to consolidate these entities. In addition, we might at some point modify how we securitize receivables, or propose modifications to existing securitization facilities, such that the consolidation of these entities could be required. If this occurred, we would include the receivables as assets on our balance sheets and also would include a loan loss reserve. Similarly, we no longer would include the corresponding retained interests as assets. There also would be significant changes to our statements of operations and cash flows. The net effect of consolidation would be dependent upon the amount and nature of the receivables at the time they were consolidated, and although it is difficult to predict the net effect of consolidation, it is likely to be material.
Internet security breaches could damage our reputation and business. Internet security breaches could damage our reputation and business. As part of our growth strategy, we may expand our origination of credit card accounts over the Internet. The secure transmission of confidential information over the Internet is essential to maintaining consumer confidence in our products and services offered online. Advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries or other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the technology used by us to protect customer application and transaction data transmitted over the Internet. Security breaches could damage our reputation and expose us to a risk of loss or litigation. Moreover, consumers generally are concerned with security and privacy on the Internet, and any publicized security problems could inhibit the growth of the Internet as a means of conducting commercial transactions. Our ability to solicit new account holders over the Internet would be severely impeded if consumers become unwilling to transmit confidential information online.
Investments that we make in the securities of others may be more risky and volatile than similar assets owned by us. From time-to-time we purchase debt and securities of others, principally those issued by asset-backed securitization trusts (e.g., notes secured or "backed" by pools of assets) that represent sub-prime credit risks of individuals. These securities in many cases are junior, including below investment grade, traunches of securities issued by the trusts. The assets underlying these securities are not originated by us and, accordingly, may not meet the underwriting standards that we follow in originating receivables. Further, we do not have direct control over the management of the underlying assets and, similarly, they may not be managed as effectively as we would manage similar assets. As a result, the securities in which we invest may carry higher risks, including risks of higher delinquencies and charge offs, risks of covenant violations and risks of value impairment due to the claims of more senior securities issued by the trusts, than similar assets originated and owned by us. These higher risks can cause much greater valuation volatility for these securities than we typically have experienced and would expect to experience on our holdings of securities underlying the trusts that we service. And although these securities generally are traded in an active secondary market, valuation volatility also can be expected to result from liquidity needs that we might have in the future, including any need that we may have for quick liquidity or to meet margin requirements related to our investments in these securities should their prices decline. In turn, this could result in steep and immediate impairments in the values of the securities as presented within our financial statements and could cause our financial position and results of operations to deteriorate, possibly materially. At December 31, 2006, we had investments in the debt and similar securities of others of $141.7 million.
The price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly, and this may make it difficult for you to resell your shares of our common stock when you want or at prices you find attractive. The price of our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market constantly changes. We expect that the market price of our common stock will continue to fluctuate. The market price of our common stock may fluctuate in response to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include the following:
- actual or anticipated fluctuations in our operating results;
- changes in expectations as to our future financial performance, including financial estimates by securities analysts and investors;
- the operating and stock performance of our competitors;
- announcements by us or our competitors of new products or services or significant contracts, acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments;
- changes in interest rates;
- the announcement of enforcement actions or investigations against us or our competitors or other negative publicity relating to us or our industry;
- changes in accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP"), laws, regulations or the interpretations thereof that affect our various business activities and segments;
- general domestic or international economic, market and political conditions;
- additions or departures of key personnel; and
- future sales of our common stock and the share lending agreement.
In addition, the stock markets from time to time experience extreme price and volume fluctuations that may be unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of companies. These broad fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance.
Future sales of our common stock or equity-related securities in the public market, including sales of our common stock pursuant to share lending agreements or in short sales transactions by purchasers of convertible notes securities, could adversely affect the trading price of our common stock and our ability to raise funds in new stock offerings. Sales of significant amounts of our common stock or equity-related securities in the public market, including sales pursuant to share lending agreements, or the perception that such sales will occur, could adversely affect prevailing trading prices of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through future offerings of equity or equity-related securities. No prediction can be made as to the effect, if any, that future sales of shares of common stock or the availability of shares of common stock for future sale, including sales of our common stock in short sales transactions by purchasers of the notes, will have on the trading price of our common stock.
We have the ability to issue preferred shares without shareholder approval. Our common shares may be subordinate to classes of preferred shares issued in the future in the payment of dividends and other distributions made with respect to common shares, including distributions upon liquidation or dissolution. Our articles of incorporation permit our board of directors to issue preferred shares without first obtaining shareholder approval. If we issued preferred shares, these additional securities may have dividend or liquidation preferences senior to the common shares. If we issue convertible preferred shares, a subsequent conversion may dilute the current common shareholders' interest.
Our executive officers, directors and parties related to them, in the aggregate, control a majority of our voting stock and may have the ability to control matters requiring shareholder approval. Our executive officers, directors and parties related to them own a large enough stake in us to have an influence on, if not control of, the matters presented to shareholders. As a result, these shareholders may have the ability to control matters requiring shareholder approval, including the election and removal of directors, the approval of significant corporate transactions, such as any reclassification, reorganization, merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets and the control of our management and affairs. Accordingly, this concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change of control of us, impede a merger, consolidation, takeover or other business combination involving us or discourage a potential acquirer from making a tender offer or otherwise attempting to obtain control of us, which in turn could have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. Note Regarding Risk Factors
The risk factors presented above are all of the ones that we currently consider material. However, they are not the only ones facing our company. Additional risks not presently known to us, or which we currently consider immaterial, may also adversely affect us. There may be risks that a particular investor views differently from us, and our analysis might be wrong. If any of the risks that we face actually occur, our business, financial condition and operating results could be materially adversely affected and could differ materially from any possible results suggested by any forward-looking statements that we have made or might make. In such case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose part or all of your investment. We expressly disclaim any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.
|