Attached files
file | filename |
---|---|
EXCEL - IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT - APOLLO EDUCATION GROUP INC | Financial_Report.xls |
EX-31.2 - EX-31.2 - APOLLO EDUCATION GROUP INC | p17150exv31w2.htm |
EX-32.3 - EX-32.3 - APOLLO EDUCATION GROUP INC | p17150exv32w3.htm |
EX-31.1 - EX-31.1 - APOLLO EDUCATION GROUP INC | p17150exv31w1.htm |
EX-31.3 - EX-31.3 - APOLLO EDUCATION GROUP INC | p17150exv31w3.htm |
EX-32.2 - EX-32.2 - APOLLO EDUCATION GROUP INC | p17150exv32w2.htm |
EX-32.1 - EX-32.1 - APOLLO EDUCATION GROUP INC | p17150exv32w1.htm |
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
þ | QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended February 28, 2010
OR
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission file number: 0-25232
APOLLO GROUP, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
ARIZONA | 86-0419443 | |
(State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S. Employer | |
incorporation or organization) | Identification No.) |
4025 S. RIVERPOINT PARKWAY, PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85040
(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(480) 966-5394
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
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 Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T 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 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
Securities Exchange Act).
YES o NO þ
AS OF March 19, 2010, THE FOLLOWING SHARES OF STOCK WERE OUTSTANDING:
Apollo Group Class A common stock, no par value
|
151,121,000 Shares | |
Apollo Group Class B common stock, no par value
|
475,000 Shares |
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
FORM 10-Q
INDEX
FORM 10-Q
INDEX
2
Table of Contents
Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A), contains certain forward-looking statements within
the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical
fact may be forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements include, among others,
those statements regarding future events and future results of Apollo Group, Inc. (the Company,
Apollo Group, Apollo, APOL, we, us or our) that are based on current expectations,
estimates, forecasts, and the beliefs and assumptions of us and our management, and speak only as
of the date made and are not guarantees of future performance or results. In some cases,
forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as may, will, should,
could, believe, expect, anticipate, estimate, plan, predict, target, potential,
continue, objectives, or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Such
forward-looking statements are necessarily estimates based upon current information and involve a
number of risks and uncertainties. Such statements should be viewed with caution. Actual events or
results may differ materially from the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a
result of a variety of factors. While it is impossible to identify all such factors, factors that
could cause actual results to differ materially from those estimated by us include but are not
limited to:
| changes in the regulation of the education industry, including the regulatory and other requirements discussed in Item 1, Business, of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended August 31, 2009, under Accreditation and Jurisdictional Authorizations, Financial Aid Programs, and Regulatory Environment; | ||
| each of the factors discussed in Item 1A, Risk Factors, of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended August 31, 2009 and Part II, Item 1A, Risk Factors, in this 10-Q; and | ||
| those factors set forth in Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended August 31, 2009 and Part I, Item 2, Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, in this Form 10-Q. |
The cautionary statements referred to in this section also should be considered in connection with
any subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements that may be issued by us or persons
acting on our behalf. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking
statements for any changes, events, or circumstances occurring after the date of this report.
Furthermore, we cannot guarantee future results, events, levels of activity, performance, or
achievements.
3
Table of Contents
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
As of | ||||||||
February 28, | August 31, | |||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
ASSETS: |
||||||||
Current assets |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 660,844 | $ | 968,246 | ||||
Restricted cash and cash equivalents |
507,151 | 432,304 | ||||||
Accounts receivable, net |
261,205 | 298,270 | ||||||
Deferred tax assets, current portion |
102,078 | 88,022 | ||||||
Prepaid taxes |
47,983 | 57,658 | ||||||
Other current assets |
38,926 | 35,517 | ||||||
Assets held for sale from discontinued operations (Note 3) |
24,750 | | ||||||
Total current assets |
1,642,937 | 1,880,017 | ||||||
Property and equipment, net |
573,740 | 557,507 | ||||||
Marketable securities |
19,579 | 19,579 | ||||||
Goodwill |
488,686 | 522,358 | ||||||
Intangible assets, net |
180,155 | 203,671 | ||||||
Deferred tax assets, less current portion |
81,431 | 66,254 | ||||||
Other assets |
14,043 | 13,991 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 3,000,571 | $ | 3,263,377 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY: |
||||||||
Current liabilities |
||||||||
Short-term borrowings and current portion of long-term debt |
$ | 54,587 | $ | 461,365 | ||||
Accounts payable |
71,718 | 66,928 | ||||||
Accrued liabilities |
218,521 | 268,418 | ||||||
Student deposits |
522,548 | 491,639 | ||||||
Deferred revenue |
344,555 | 333,041 | ||||||
Other current liabilities |
98,630 | 133,887 | ||||||
Liabilities held for sale from discontinued operations (Note 3) |
5,734 | | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
1,316,293 | 1,755,278 | ||||||
Long-term debt |
121,522 | 127,701 | ||||||
Deferred tax liabilities |
53,659 | 55,636 | ||||||
Other long-term liabilities |
109,518 | 100,149 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
1,600,992 | 2,038,764 | ||||||
Commitments and contingencies (Note 15) |
||||||||
Shareholders equity |
||||||||
Preferred stock, no par value |
| | ||||||
Apollo Class A nonvoting common stock, no par value |
103 | 103 | ||||||
Apollo Class B voting common stock, no par value |
1 | 1 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital |
52,673 | 1,139 | ||||||
Apollo Class A treasury stock, at cost |
(2,210,792 | ) | (2,022,623 | ) | ||||
Retained earnings |
3,527,791 | 3,195,043 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
(30,122 | ) | (13,740 | ) | ||||
Total Apollo shareholders equity |
1,339,654 | 1,159,923 | ||||||
Noncontrolling interests |
59,925 | 64,690 | ||||||
Total equity |
1,399,579 | 1,224,613 | ||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
$ | 3,000,571 | $ | 3,263,377 | ||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(Unaudited)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(Unaudited)
Three Months Ended February 28, | Six Months Ended February 28, | |||||||||||||||
(in thousands, except per share data) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Net revenue |
$ | 1,070,336 | $ | 869,543 | $ | 2,328,995 | $ | 1,832,825 | ||||||||
Costs and expenses: |
||||||||||||||||
Instructional costs and services |
517,344 | 364,416 | 1,036,788 | 733,392 | ||||||||||||
Selling and promotional |
263,549 | 224,567 | 537,624 | 450,930 | ||||||||||||
General and administrative |
71,953 | 69,450 | 144,034 | 127,316 | ||||||||||||
Estimated litigation loss (Note 15) |
44,500 | | 44,500 | | ||||||||||||
Total costs and expenses |
897,346 | 658,433 | 1,762,946 | 1,311,638 | ||||||||||||
Operating income |
172,990 | 211,110 | 566,049 | 521,187 | ||||||||||||
Interest income |
525 | 3,430 | 1,457 | 8,807 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(3,220 | ) | (621 | ) | (6,128 | ) | (2,050 | ) | ||||||||
Other, net |
(79 | ) | (201 | ) | (749 | ) | (2,633 | ) | ||||||||
Income from continuing operations before income taxes |
170,216 | 213,718 | 560,629 | 525,311 | ||||||||||||
Provision for income taxes |
(69,064 | ) | (85,190 | ) | (219,045 | ) | (214,535 | ) | ||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
101,152 | 128,528 | 341,584 | 310,776 | ||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax (Note 3) |
(10,638 | ) | (3,452 | ) | (10,938 | ) | (5,392 | ) | ||||||||
Net income |
90,514 | 125,076 | 330,646 | 305,384 | ||||||||||||
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests |
2,092 | 270 | 2,102 | 322 | ||||||||||||
Net income attributable to Apollo |
$ | 92,606 | $ | 125,346 | $ | 332,748 | $ | 305,706 | ||||||||
Earnings (loss) per share Basic: |
||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations attributable to Apollo |
$ | 0.67 | $ | 0.80 | $ | 2.22 | $ | 1.94 | ||||||||
Discontinued operations attributable to Apollo |
(0.07 | ) | (0.02 | ) | (0.07 | ) | (0.03 | ) | ||||||||
Basic income per share attributable to Apollo |
$ | 0.60 | $ | 0.78 | $ | 2.15 | $ | 1.91 | ||||||||
Earnings (loss) per share Diluted: |
||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations attributable to Apollo |
$ | 0.67 | $ | 0.79 | $ | 2.21 | $ | 1.92 | ||||||||
Discontinued operations attributable to Apollo |
(0.07 | ) | (0.02 | ) | (0.07 | ) | (0.03 | ) | ||||||||
Diluted income per share attributable to Apollo |
$ | 0.60 | $ | 0.77 | $ | 2.14 | $ | 1.89 | ||||||||
Basic weighted average shares outstanding |
154,119 | 160,153 | 154,473 | 159,643 | ||||||||||||
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding |
155,168 | 162,757 | 155,621 | 161,806 | ||||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(Unaudited)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(Unaudited)
Three Months Ended February 28, | Six Months Ended February 28, | |||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 90,514 | $ | 125,076 | $ | 330,646 | $ | 305,384 | ||||||||
Other comprehensive income (loss) (net of tax): |
||||||||||||||||
Currency translation gain (loss), net |
(23,666 | ) | 411 | (19,045 | ) | (9,907 | ) | |||||||||
Unrealized loss on auction-rate securities |
| | | (1,322 | ) | |||||||||||
Comprehensive income |
66,848 | 125,487 | 311,601 | 294,155 | ||||||||||||
Comprehensive loss attributable to
noncontrolling interests |
5,368 | 205 | 4,765 | 2,574 | ||||||||||||
Comprehensive income attributable to Apollo |
$ | 72,216 | $ | 125,692 | $ | 316,366 | $ | 296,729 | ||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
6
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FROM CONTINUING AND DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FROM CONTINUING AND DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
Six Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Cash flows provided by (used in) operating activities: |
||||||||
Net income |
$ | 330,646 | $ | 305,384 | ||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
||||||||
Share-based compensation |
29,115 | 31,358 | ||||||
Excess tax benefits from share-based compensation |
(338 | ) | (11,181 | ) | ||||
Depreciation and amortization |
64,661 | 46,338 | ||||||
Goodwill impairment on discontinued operations (Note 3) |
9,400 | | ||||||
Amortization of deferred gain on sale-leasebacks |
(883 | ) | (818 | ) | ||||
Non-cash foreign currency losses, net |
534 | 2,599 | ||||||
Provision for uncollectible accounts receivable |
136,582 | 70,913 | ||||||
Estimated litigation loss (Note 15) |
44,500 | | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
(19,675 | ) | (12,583 | ) | ||||
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts receivable |
(116,879 | ) | (48,272 | ) | ||||
Other assets |
(5,606 | ) | (9,112 | ) | ||||
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
(89,675 | ) | 18,137 | |||||
Income taxes payable |
(2,241 | ) | (51,953 | ) | ||||
Student deposits |
31,378 | 108,216 | ||||||
Deferred revenue |
18,443 | 20,921 | ||||||
Other liabilities |
4,902 | 5,696 | ||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
434,864 | 475,643 | ||||||
Cash flows provided by (used in) investing activities: |
||||||||
Additions to property and equipment |
(68,032 | ) | (64,019 | ) | ||||
Maturities of marketable securities |
| 1,660 | ||||||
Increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents |
(74,847 | ) | (114,232 | ) | ||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(142,879 | ) | (176,591 | ) | ||||
Cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities: |
||||||||
Payments on borrowings |
(423,850 | ) | (15,498 | ) | ||||
Proceeds from borrowings |
17,819 | 13,620 | ||||||
Issuance of Apollo Class A common stock |
8,567 | 96,486 | ||||||
Apollo Class A common stock purchased for treasury |
(201,111 | ) | (2,505 | ) | ||||
Excess tax benefits from share-based compensation |
338 | 11,181 | ||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
(598,237 | ) | 103,284 | |||||
Exchange rate effect on cash and cash equivalents |
(1,150 | ) | (1,107 | ) | ||||
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
(307,402 | ) | 401,229 | |||||
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
968,246 | 483,195 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
$ | 660,844 | $ | 884,424 | ||||
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information |
||||||||
Cash paid during the period for income taxes, net of refunds |
$ | 243,435 | $ | 269,646 | ||||
Cash paid during the period for interest |
$ | 3,583 | $ | 1,263 | ||||
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash investing and financing activities |
||||||||
Credits received for tenant improvements |
$ | 8,756 | $ | 7,161 | ||||
Purchases of property and equipment included in accounts payable |
$ | 6,741 | $ | 5,251 | ||||
Restricted stock units vested and released |
$ | 2,802 | $ | 7,362 | ||||
Unrealized loss on auction-rate securities |
$ | | $ | 2,203 |
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
7
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 1. Nature of Operations
Apollo Group, Inc., its wholly-owned subsidiaries and subsidiaries that we control, collectively
referred to herein as the Company, Apollo Group, Apollo, APOL, we, us or our, has
been an education provider for more than 35 years. We offer innovative and distinctive educational
programs and services both online and on-campus at the undergraduate, masters and doctoral levels
through our wholly-owned subsidiaries:
| The University of Phoenix, Inc. (University of Phoenix); | ||
| Western International University, Inc. (Western International University); | ||
| Institute for Professional Development (IPD); | ||
| The College for Financial Planning Institutes Corporation (CFFP); and | ||
| Meritus University, Inc. (Meritus). |
In addition to these wholly-owned subsidiaries, we have an 86.1% ownership interest in Apollo
Global, Inc. (Apollo Global), which pursues investments primarily in the international education
services industry, and which we consolidate in our financial statements. Apollo Global has
completed the following acquisitions:
| BPP Holdings plc (BPP) in the United Kingdom; | ||
| Universidad de Artes, Ciencias y Comunicación (UNIACC) in Chile; and | ||
| Universidad Latinoamericana (ULA) in Mexico. |
We also operate online high school programs through our Insight Schools, Inc. (Insight Schools)
wholly-owned subsidiary. In the second quarter of fiscal year 2010, we engaged an investment bank
and proceeded with a formal plan to sell Insight Schools as we determined that the business is no
longer consistent with our long-term strategic objectives. Accordingly, we have presented Insight
Schools as held for sale and as discontinued operations. Refer to Note 3, Discontinued Operations,
for further discussion.
Our operations are generally subject to seasonal trends. We experience, and expect to continue to
experience, fluctuations in our results of operations as a result of seasonal variations in the
level of student enrollments and timing of certification exams.
| University of Phoenix University of Phoenix enrolls students throughout the year, with its net revenue generally lower in the second quarter (December through February) than the other quarters due to holiday breaks in December and January. | ||
| BPP BPP experiences significant seasonality associated with the timing of when its courses begin and exam dates, which generally results in considerably lower net revenue in the second and to an even greater degree in the fourth quarters as compared to the other quarters. In addition, as the cost structure of BPP is relatively fixed, BPPs profitability is substantially lower in the second and fourth quarters. | ||
| Other subsidiaries Many of our other subsidiaries experience significant seasonality, as they have limited enrollment during their respective summer breaks and winter holidays. |
Note 2. Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
The unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Apollo
Group, Inc., its wholly-owned subsidiaries, and subsidiaries that we control. These unaudited
interim condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to the rules and
regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and, in the opinion of management,
contain all adjustments necessary to fairly present the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows for the periods presented.
Certain information and note disclosures normally included in these unaudited interim condensed
consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to
Securities and Exchange Commission rules. We believe that the disclosures made are adequate to make
the information presented not misleading. We consistently applied the accounting policies described
in Item 8, Financial
8
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Statements and Supplementary Data, in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 27, 2009 in preparing these unaudited interim
condensed consolidated financial statements. For a discussion of our critical accounting policies,
please refer to our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K. These unaudited interim condensed consolidated
financial statements and accompanying notes should be read in conjunction with Item 2, Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, included in this filing
and the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained in our 2009 Annual
Report on Form 10-K.
Our fiscal year is from September 1 to August 31. Unless otherwise noted, references to particular
years or quarters refer to our fiscal years and the associated quarters of those fiscal years.
Because of the seasonal nature of our business, the results of operations for the three and six
months ended February 28, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for the
entire fiscal year.
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make certain
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities and the
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the
reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ
from these estimates.
Assets and liabilities expected to be sold or disposed of are presented separately in our Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets as assets or liabilities held for sale. If we determine we will not
have continued significant involvement with components that are classified as held for sale, the
results of operations of these components are presented separately as income (loss) from
discontinued operations, net of tax, in the current and prior periods. Refer to Note 3,
Discontinued Operations, for further discussion.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Pronouncements Adopted
In September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 157, Fair Value Measurements (SFAS 157) (codified in ASC 820,
Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures), which provides enhanced guidance for using fair value
to measure assets and liabilities. On September 1, 2008, we partially adopted the provisions in
SFAS 157 for fair valuing financial assets and liabilities and non-financial assets and liabilities
that are recognized or disclosed at fair value on a recurring basis. The partial adoption of SFAS
157 did not have a material impact on our financial condition and results of operations. Effective
September 1, 2009, we completed our full adoption of the provisions of SFAS 157 with respect to
fair valuing non-financial assets and liabilities not measured on a recurring basis, and the
adoption did not have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, and
disclosures.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), Business Combinations (SFAS
141(R)) (codified in ASC 805, Business Combinations), which is a revision of SFAS 141, Business
Combinations (SFAS 141). The primary requirements of SFAS 141(R) are as follows:
| upon initially obtaining control, the acquiring entity in a business combination recognizes 100% of the fair values of the acquired assets, including goodwill, and assumed liabilities, with only limited exceptions even if the acquirer has not acquired 100% of its targetas a consequence, the current step acquisition model has been eliminated; | ||
| contingent consideration arrangements are fair valued at the acquisition date and included in the purchase price considerationthe concept of recognizing contingent consideration at a later date when the amount of that consideration is determinable beyond a reasonable doubt, is no longer applicable; | ||
| for prior business combinations, adjustments for recognized changes in acquired tax uncertainties are recognized in accordance with the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes An Interpretation of FASB No. 109 (codified in ASC 740, Income Taxes), and adjustments for recognized changes in the valuation allowance for acquired deferred tax assets are recognized in income tax expense in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes (codified in ASC 740, Income Taxes); and | ||
| all transaction costs must be expensed as incurred. |
9
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
In April 2009, the FASB issued FSP No. FAS 141(R)-1, Accounting for Assets Acquired and
Liabilities Assumed in a Business Combination That Arise from Contingencies (FSP FAS 141(R)-1)
(codified in ASC 805). FSP FAS 141(R)-1 amends and clarifies SFAS 141(R) to address application
issues raised about the initial recognition and measurement, subsequent measurement and accounting,
and disclosure of assets and liabilities arising from contingencies in a business combination. SFAS
141(R) and FSP FAS 141(R)-1 apply prospectively to business combinations for which the acquisition
date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after
December 15, 2008. We adopted SFAS 141(R) and FSP FAS 141(R)-1 on September 1, 2009. The adoption
of SFAS 141(R) and FSP FAS 141(R)-1 did not have a material impact on our financial condition,
results of operations, and disclosures. Deferred acquisition costs as of the adoption of SFAS
141(R) were not significant and were expensed as of August 31, 2009.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Non-controlling Interests in Consolidated
Financial Statements An Amendment of ARB No. 51 (SFAS 160) (codified in ASC 810,
Consolidation). SFAS 160 establishes new accounting and reporting standards for the
non-controlling interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. SFAS 160
requires non-controlling interests to be treated as a separate component of equity and any changes
in the parents ownership interest (in which control is retained) are accounted for as equity
transactions. However, a change in ownership of a consolidated subsidiary that results in
deconsolidation triggers gain or loss recognition, with the establishment of a new fair value basis
in any remaining non-controlling ownership interests. SFAS 160 also establishes disclosure
requirements that clearly identify and distinguish between the interests of the parent and the
non-controlling interests. SFAS 160 is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December
15, 2008 and the provisions are prospective upon adoption, except for the presentation and
disclosure requirements, which must be applied retrospectively for all periods presented.
Accordingly, we adopted SFAS 160 on September 1, 2009 and retrospectively adjusted the following
statements:
| Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of August 31, 2009; | ||
| Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income for the three and six months ended February 28, 2009; | ||
| Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the three and six months ended February 28, 2009; and | ||
| Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows from Continuing and Discontinued Operations for the six months ended February 28, 2009. |
Refer to Note 12, Shareholders Equity, for additional disclosure related to our adoption of the
provisions of SFAS 160.
Pronouncements Not Yet Adopted
In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R) (SFAS
167) (codified in ASC 810), which modifies how a company determines when an entity that is
insufficiently capitalized or is not controlled through voting (or similar rights) should be
consolidated. SFAS 167 clarifies that the determination of whether a company is required to
consolidate an entity is based on, among other things, an entitys purpose and design and a
companys ability to direct the activities of the entity that most significantly impact the
entitys economic performance. SFAS 167 requires an ongoing reassessment of whether a company is
the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity. SFAS 167 also requires additional
disclosures about a companys involvement in variable interest entities and any significant changes
in risk exposure due to that involvement. SFAS 167 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2009 and is effective for us on September 1, 2010. We are currently evaluating the
impact that the adoption of SFAS 167 will have on our financial condition, results of operations,
and disclosures.
In October 2009, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2009-13, Revenue
Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangementsa consensus of the FASB Emerging
Issues Task Force (ASU 2009-13), which provides guidance on whether multiple deliverables exist,
how the arrangement should be separated, and the consideration allocated. ASU 2009-13 requires an
entity to allocate revenue in an arrangement using estimated selling prices of deliverables if a
vendor does not have vendor-specific objective evidence or third-party evidence of selling price.
ASU 2009-13 is effective for the first annual reporting period beginning on or after June 15, 2010
and may be applied retrospectively for all periods presented or prospectively to arrangements
entered into or materially modified after the adoption date. Early adoption is permitted provided
that the revised guidance is retroactively applied to the beginning of the year of adoption. ASU
2009-13 is effective for us on September 1, 2010. We are currently evaluating the impact that the
adoption of ASU 2009-13 will have on our financial condition, results of operations, and
disclosures.
10
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-06, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic
820): Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements (ASU 2010-06). ASU 2010-06 amends ASC
820 to add new disclosure requirements for significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and 2
measurements and to provide a gross presentation of the activities within the Level 3 rollforward.
ASU 2010-06 also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and
about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The disclosure requirements in
ASU 2010-06 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15,
2009, and are effective for us on March 1, 2010, except for the requirement to present the Level 3
rollforward on a gross basis, which is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2010, and is effective for us on September 1, 2011. We do not believe that the partial adoption of
ASU 2010-06 on March 1, 2010 will have a material impact on our fair value measurement disclosures.
We are currently evaluating the impact that the full adoption of ASU 2010-06, with respect to the
Level 3 rollforward, will have on our fair value measurement disclosures.
Note 3. Discontinued Operations
In the second quarter of fiscal year 2010, we initiated a formal plan to sell Insight Schools and
engaged an investment bank as we determined that the business is no longer consistent with our
long-term strategic objectives. We also began the process of actively marketing the sale of Insight
Schools and based on the estimated timeframe in our current plan of sale, we believe the sale is
probable within the next year. We do not expect to have significant continuing involvement with
Insight Schools after it is sold. Based on these factors, we concluded that we meet the criteria
for presenting Insight Schools as held for sale and as discontinued operations. Accordingly,
Insight Schools assets and liabilities are classified as held for sale in our Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of February 28, 2010 and Insight Schools operating results are
presented as discontinued operations in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income for all
periods presented. Cash flows from discontinued operations were not material and are included with
cash flows from continuing operations in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows from
Continuing and Discontinued Operations. Insight Schools was previously presented as its own
reportable segment.
Subsequent to February 28, 2010, we obtained exit price information from advisors and interested
parties specific to the sale of Insight Schools. To determine the fair value of Insight Schools, we
considered this information in revising our estimate of fair value as a result of our intent to
sell Insight Schools. Historically, our fair value analysis used a combination of the discounted
cash flow and market-based approaches by applying a 75%/25% weighting factor to these respective
valuation methods. The non-binding offers recently received for Insight Schools are significantly
lower than the estimated fair value derived from our prior valuation methods. Rather, the
non-binding offers recently received for Insight Schools are based on Insight Schools recent
operating performance, which has generated and is expected to continue to generate operating losses
in the near term. Refer to Note 6, Goodwill and Intangible Assets, and Note 7, Fair Value
Measurements, for further discussion.
We are required to present Insight Schools assets and liabilities held for sale at the lower of
the carrying amount or fair value, less cost to sell. Accordingly, we evaluated Insight Schools
respective assets held for sale, including goodwill and other long-lived assets for impairment. Our
goodwill impairment analysis results indicated that the carrying value of the Insight Schools
reporting unit of approximately $28.4 million exceeded the estimated fair value less cost to sell
of approximately $19.0 million and resulted in recognizing a goodwill impairment charge of $9.4
million. This charge recorded in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 is reflected as a component
of loss from discontinued operations for the three and six months ended February 28, 2010, as
presented below.
The major components of assets and liabilities of Insight Schools presented separately in the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as held for sale as of February 28, 2010 are outlined below.
For comparability purposes, we have also presented below Insight Schools assets and liabilities as
of August 31, 2009, which are included in the respective financial statement line items.
February 28, | August 31, | |||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Accounts receivable, net |
$ | 11,281 | $ | 6,564 | ||||
Property and equipment, net |
6,881 | 5,721 | ||||||
Goodwill |
3,342 | 12,742 | ||||||
Other |
3,246 | 1,563 | ||||||
Total Insight Schools assets |
$ | 24,750 | $ | 26,590 | ||||
Total Insight Schools liabilities |
$ | 5,734 | $ | 3,066 | ||||
11
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The following table summarizes Insight Schools operating results for the three and six months
ended February 28, 2010 and 2009, which are presented in loss from discontinued operations, net of
tax in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income:
Three Months Ended February 28, | Six Months Ended February 28, | |||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Net revenue |
$ | 9,031 | $ | 6,586 | $ | 20,673 | $ | 14,271 | ||||||||
Goodwill impairment(1) |
(9,400 | ) | | (9,400 | ) | | ||||||||||
Other costs and expenses |
(11,136 | ) | (12,299 | ) | (23,237 | ) | (23,196 | ) | ||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations before income taxes |
(11,505 | ) | (5,713 | ) | (11,964 | ) | (8,925 | ) | ||||||||
Benefit from income taxes(1) |
867 | 2,261 | 1,026 | 3,533 | ||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations |
$ | (10,638 | ) | $ | (3,452 | ) | $ | (10,938 | ) | $ | (5,392 | ) | ||||
(1) | As Insight Schools goodwill is not deductible for tax purposes, we did not record a tax benefit associated with the goodwill impairment charge. |
We include only revenues and costs, including the goodwill impairment charge discussed above,
directly attributable to the discontinued operations, and not those attributable to the ongoing
entity. Accordingly, no interest expense or general corporate overhead have been allocated to
Insight Schools. Additionally, we have ceased depreciation and amortization on property and
equipment and finite-lived intangible assets at Insight Schools.
Note 4. Acquisitions
BPP
On July 30, 2009, Apollo Global, through a wholly-owned United Kingdom subsidiary, acquired the
entire issued and to be issued ordinary share capital of BPP, a company registered in England and
Wales, for a cash purchase price of 620 pence per share. BPP is a provider of education and
training to professionals in the legal and finance industries and the BPP College of Professional
Studies is the first proprietary institution to have been granted degree awarding powers in the
United Kingdom. At exchange rates on the date of the acquisition, the purchase price for BPP,
including assumed debt and transaction related expenses, was $601.6 million.
We accounted for the BPP acquisition using the purchase method of accounting prior to our September
1, 2009 adoption of SFAS 141(R) (codified in ASC 805, Business Combinations) noted in Recent
Accounting Pronouncements in Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies. To value the acquired assets
and assumed liabilities, we used the following valuation methodologies:
| Land and buildings included in property and equipment were valued using the market approach. | ||
| Trademarks were valued using the relief-from-royalty method, which represents the benefit of owning an intangible asset rather than paying royalties for its use. | ||
| All other intangible assets were valued using one of the following methods; the income approach, specifically the cost savings method and excess earnings method, or the replacement cost approach. | ||
| Certain other long-term obligations were valued using the discounted cash flow approach utilizing current discount rates, cost estimates and assumptions. | ||
| All other net assets and liabilities carrying value approximated fair value at the time of the acquisition. |
A summary of the purchase price allocation is as follows:
($ in thousands) | ||||
Tangible assets (net of acquired liabilities) |
$ | (15,346 | ) | |
Finite-lived intangible assets |
51,304 | |||
Indefinite-lived intangible assets |
139,990 | |||
Goodwill |
425,638 | |||
Total allocated purchase price |
$ | 601,586 | ||
12
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
We assigned indefinite lives to the acquired trademarks and certain accreditations and designations
as we believe that each of these intangible assets has the continued ability to generate cash flows
indefinitely. In addition, there are no legal, regulatory, contractual, economic or other factors
to limit the useful life of these intangible assets and we intend to renew trademarks and
accreditations and designations, which can be accomplished at little cost.
BPPs operating results are included in our condensed consolidated financial statements from the
date of acquisition.
Pro Forma Financial Results
The following unaudited pro forma financial results of operations are presented as
if the acquisition of BPP had been completed as of September 1, 2008:
Six Months Ended | ||||
(in thousands, except per share data) | February 28, 2009 | |||
Pro forma net revenue |
$ | 1,986,698 | ||
Pro forma net income attributable to Apollo |
$ | 321,808 | ||
Pro forma earnings per share: |
||||
Basic income per share attributable to Apollo |
$ | 2.02 | ||
Diluted income per share attributable to Apollo |
$ | 1.99 | ||
Basic weighted average shares outstanding |
159,643 | |||
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding |
161,806 | |||
The pro forma financial information is presented for informational purposes and includes certain
adjustments that are factual and supportable, consisting of increased interest expense on debt used
to fund the acquisition, adjustments to depreciation expense related to the fair value adjustment
for property and equipment, and amortization related to acquired intangible assets, as well as the
related tax effect of these adjustments. The pro forma information is not indicative of the results
of operations that would have been achieved if the acquisition and related borrowings had taken
place at the beginning of the applicable presented period, or of future results of the consolidated
entities.
Note 5. Accounts Receivable, Net
Accounts receivable, net consist of the following as of February 28, 2010 and August 31, 2009:
February 28, | August 31, | |||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Student accounts receivable |
$ | 404,904 | $ | 380,226 | ||||
Less allowance for doubtful accounts |
(170,138 | ) | (110,420 | ) | ||||
Net student accounts receivable |
234,766 | 269,806 | ||||||
Other receivables |
26,439 | 28,464 | ||||||
Total accounts receivable, net |
$ | 261,205 | $ | 298,270 | ||||
13
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Student accounts receivable is composed primarily of amounts due related to tuition. In the second
quarter of fiscal year 2010, we began presenting Insight Schools assets and liabilities as held
for sale and its operating results as discontinued operations. Refer to Note 3, Discontinued
Operations, for further discussion and disclosure of the components of Insight Schools assets and
liabilities.
Bad debt expense is included in instructional costs and services in our Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Income. Please refer to our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K for further discussion of
our related critical accounting policy. The following table summarizes the activity in the related
allowance for doubtful accounts for the three and six months ended February 28, 2010 and 2009:
Three Months Ended February 28, | Six Months Ended February 28, | |||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Beginning allowance for doubtful accounts |
$ | 138,405 | $ | 88,274 | $ | 110,420 | $ | 78,362 | ||||||||
Provision for uncollectible accounts receivable |
73,883 | 36,056 | 136,582 | 70,913 | ||||||||||||
Write-offs, net of recoveries |
(41,291 | ) | (28,615 | ) | (76,005 | ) | (53,560 | ) | ||||||||
Included in assets held for sale |
(859 | ) | | (859 | ) | | ||||||||||
Ending allowance for doubtful accounts |
$ | 170,138 | $ | 95,715 | $ | 170,138 | $ | 95,715 | ||||||||
The increase in bad debt expense is primarily due to University of Phoenixs lower collection
rates. Collection rates have declined as a result of the economic downturn, the effects of certain
operational changes and increases in receivables from students enrolled in associates degree
programs. Students enrolled in associates degree programs generally persist at lower rates than
those in bachelors and graduate level programs, resulting in higher bad debts when these students
withdraw from the University of Phoenix.
Note 6. Goodwill and Intangible Assets
Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the amount assigned
to the net assets acquired and liabilities assumed. Changes in the carrying
amount of goodwill by reportable segment from August 31, 2009 to February 28,
2010 are as follows:
University of | Apollo Global | Insight | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | Phoenix | BPP | Other | Schools | Schools | Goodwill | ||||||||||||||||||
Goodwill as of August 31, 2009 |
$ | 37,018 | $ | 421,836 | $ | 33,871 | $ | 12,742 | $ | 16,891 | $ | 522,358 | ||||||||||||
Goodwill impairment |
| | | (9,400 | ) | | (9,400 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Included in assets held for sale |
| | | (3,342 | ) | | (3,342 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Currency translation adjustment |
| (22,204 | ) | 1,274 | | | (20,930 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Goodwill as of February 28, 2010 |
$ | 37,018 | $ | 399,632 | $ | 35,145 | $ | | $ | 16,891 | $ | 488,686 | ||||||||||||
In the second quarter of fiscal year 2010, we began presenting Insight Schools assets and
liabilities as held for sale and its operating results as discontinued operations. Additionally, we
recorded a $9.4 million impairment of Insight Schools goodwill during the second quarter of fiscal
year 2010. Refer to Note 3, Discontinued Operations, for further discussion.
Intangible assets consist of the following as of February 28, 2010 and August 31, 2009:
February 28, 2010 | August 31, 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Effect of | Effect of | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquired | Foreign | Acquired | Foreign | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Currency | Net | Gross | Currency | Net | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Carrying | Accumulated | Translation | Carrying | Carrying | Accumulated | Translation | Carrying | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | Amount | Amortization | Loss | Amount | Amount | Amortization | Loss | Amount | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Finite-lived intangible assets |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Student and customer
relationships |
$ | 26,515 | $ | (12,173 | ) | $ | (1,694 | ) | $ | 12,648 | $ | 26,515 | $ | (4,224 | ) | $ | (1,282 | ) | $ | 21,009 | ||||||||||||
Copyrights |
20,891 | (3,368 | ) | (1,103 | ) | 16,420 | 20,891 | (488 | ) | (198 | ) | 20,205 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Other |
20,676 | (6,793 | ) | (1,336 | ) | 12,547 | 23,317 | (5,233 | ) | (1,117 | ) | 16,967 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total finite-lived intangible assets |
68,082 | (22,334 | ) | (4,133 | ) | 41,615 | 70,723 | (9,945 | ) | (2,597 | ) | 58,181 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Indefinite-lived intangible assets |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trademarks |
140,797 | | (9,150 | ) | 131,647 | 140,797 | | (2,441 | ) | 138,356 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Accreditations and designations |
7,456 | | (563 | ) | 6,893 | 7,456 | | (322 | ) | 7,134 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Total indefinite-lived intangible
assets |
148,253 | | (9,713 | ) | 138,540 | 148,253 | | (2,763 | ) | 145,490 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Total intangible assets, net |
$ | 216,335 | $ | (22,334 | ) | $ | (13,846 | ) | $ | 180,155 | $ | 218,976 | $ | (9,945 | ) | $ | (5,360 | ) | $ | 203,671 | ||||||||||||
14
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Finite-lived intangible assets are amortized on either a straight-line basis or using an
accelerated method to reflect the economic useful life of the asset. The weighted average useful
lives range from 2 to 15 years. Amortization expense for intangible assets for the three months
ended February 28, 2010 and 2009 was $6.5 million and $1.0 million, respectively, and for the six
months ended February 28, 2010 and 2009 was $14.0 million and $1.9 million, respectively.
Note 7. Fair Value Measurements
Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis consist of the following as of
February 28, 2010:
Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using | ||||||||||||||||
Quoted Prices | ||||||||||||||||
in Active | ||||||||||||||||
Markets for | Significant | |||||||||||||||
Identical | Other | Significant | ||||||||||||||
Assets/ | Observable | Unobservable | ||||||||||||||
February 28, | Liabilities | Inputs | Inputs | |||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | (Level 1) | (Level 2) | (Level 3) | ||||||||||||
Assets: |
||||||||||||||||
Cash equivalents
(including restricted
cash equivalents): |
||||||||||||||||
Money market funds |
$ | 1,161,995 | $ | 1,161,995 | $ | | $ | | ||||||||
Marketable securities: |
||||||||||||||||
Auction-rate securities |
19,579 | | | 19,579 | ||||||||||||
Total assets: |
$ | 1,181,574 | $ | 1,161,995 | $ | | $ | 19,579 | ||||||||
Liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||
Other liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||
Interest rate swap |
$ | 3,938 | $ | | $ | 3,938 | $ | | ||||||||
Total liabilities: |
$ | 3,938 | $ | | $ | 3,938 | $ | | ||||||||
We measure our money market funds included in cash and restricted cash equivalents, auction-rate
securities included in marketable securities and interest rate swap included in other liabilities
on a recurring basis at fair value. For our assets and liabilities measured on a recurring basis,
we did not significantly change our valuation techniques associated with fair value measurements
from prior periods. As of February 28, 2010, cash equivalents disclosed in the table above excludes
$6.0 million of cash held in bank overnight deposit accounts that approximate fair value.
| Money market funds - Classified within Level 1 and were valued primarily using real-time quotes for transactions in active exchange markets involving identical assets. | ||
| Auction-rate securities - Classified within Level 3 due to the illiquidity of the market and were valued using a discounted cash flow model that encompassed significant unobservable inputs to determine probabilities of default and timing of auction failure, probabilities of a successful auction at par and/or repurchase at par value for each auction period, collateralization of the underlying security and credit worthiness of the issuer. The assumptions used to prepare the discounted cash flows |
15
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
include estimates for interest rates, credit spreads, timing and amount of cash flows, liquidity premiums, expected holding periods and default risk. These assumptions are subject to change as the underlying data sources and market conditions evolve. Additionally, as the market for auction-rate securities continues to be inactive, our discounted cash flow model also factored the illiquidity of the auction-rate securities market by adding a spread of 450 to 500 basis points to the applicable discount rate. | |||
| Interest rate swap We have an interest rate swap with a notional amount of £30.0 million ($46.3 million) used to minimize the interest rate exposure on a portion of BPPs variable rate debt. The interest rate swap is used to fix the variable interest rate on the associated debt. The swap is classified within Level 2 and is valued using readily available pricing sources which utilize market observable inputs including the current variable interest rate for similar types of instruments. |
At February 28, 2010, the carrying value of our debt, excluding capital leases, was $169.7 million.
Substantially all of our debt is variable interest rate debt and the carrying amount approximates
fair value.
During the six months ended February 28, 2010, we did not have any changes in our Level 3 assets
that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs.
Assets measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis consist of the following as of February 28,
2010:
Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using | ||||||||||||||||||||
Quoted Prices | ||||||||||||||||||||
in Active | Significant | Significant | ||||||||||||||||||
Markets for | Other | Unobservable | ||||||||||||||||||
February 28, | Identical Assets | Observable Inputs | Inputs | |||||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | (Level 1) | (Level 2) | (Level 3) | Total Losses | |||||||||||||||
Assets: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Assets held for sale |
||||||||||||||||||||
Goodwill |
$ | 3,342 | $ | | $ | | $ | 3,342 | $ | (9,400 | ) | |||||||||
Total |
$ | 3,342 | $ | | $ | | $ | 3,342 | $ | (9,400 | ) | |||||||||
In connection with presenting Insight Schools as held for sale in the second quarter of fiscal year
2010, we measured Insight Schools goodwill at fair value on a non-recurring basis using Level 3
inputs. The Level 3 inputs were primarily based on exit price information from advisors which
includes consideration of non-binding offers we recently received from third parties to purchase
Insight Schools. The Insight Schools goodwill balance was written down to the implied fair value,
resulting in an impairment charge of $9.4 million that is included in loss from discontinued
operations for the three and six months ended February 28, 2010. Refer to Note 3, Discontinued
Operations for further discussion.
Note 8. Accrued Liabilities
Accrued liabilities consist of the following as of February 28, 2010 and August 31, 2009:
February 28, | August 31, | |||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Estimated litigation loss |
$ | 44,500 | $ | 80,500 | ||||
Salaries, wages, and benefits |
72,882 | 76,583 | ||||||
Accrued advertising |
34,537 | 35,974 | ||||||
Accrued professional fees |
25,208 | 25,287 | ||||||
Student refunds, grants and scholarships |
11,759 | 11,287 | ||||||
Other accrued liabilities |
29,635 | 38,787 | ||||||
Total accrued liabilities |
$ | 218,521 | $ | 268,418 | ||||
16
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Please refer to Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, for discussion of estimated litigation
losses. Salaries, wages, and benefits represent amounts due to employees, faculty and third parties
for salaries, bonuses, vacation pay, and health insurance. Accrued advertising represents amounts
due for Internet marketing, direct mail campaigns, and print and broadcast advertising. Accrued
professional fees represent amounts due to third parties for outsourced student financial aid
processing and other accrued professional and legal obligations. Student refunds, grants and
scholarships represent amounts due to students for tuition refunds, federal and state grants
payable, scholarships, and other related items. Other accrued liabilities primarily includes sales
and business taxes, facilities costs such as rent and utilities, and certain accrued purchases.
Note 9. Debt
Debt and short-term borrowings consist of the following as of February 28, 2010 and August 31, 2009:
February 28, | August 31, | |||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Bank Facility, see terms below |
$ | 97,222 | $ | 495,608 | ||||
Capital lease obligations |
6,383 | 7,763 | ||||||
Other, interest rates ranging from 1.1% to 9.4% with various
maturities from 2010 to 2019 |
72,504 | 85,695 | ||||||
Total debt |
176,109 | 589,066 | ||||||
Less short-term borrowings and current portion of long-term debt |
(54,587 | ) | (461,365 | ) | ||||
Long-term debt |
$ | 121,522 | $ | 127,701 | ||||
On January 4, 2008, we entered into a syndicated $500 million credit agreement (the Bank
Facility). The Bank Facility is an unsecured revolving credit facility available for general
corporate purposes including acquisitions and stock buybacks. The Bank Facility has an expansion
feature for an aggregate principal amount of up to $250 million. The term is five years, expiring
on January 4, 2013. The Bank Facility provides a multi-currency sub-limit facility for borrowings
in certain specified foreign currencies up to $300 million.
As of August 31, 2009, we borrowed our entire credit line under the Bank Facility, which included
£63.0 million denominated in British Pounds (equivalent to $102.6 million and $97.2 million U.S.
dollars as of August 31, 2009 and February 28, 2010, respectively) related to the BPP acquisition.
We repaid the U.S. dollar denominated debt on our Bank Facility of $393 million during the first
quarter of fiscal year 2010.
The Bank Facility fees are determined based on a pricing grid that varies according to our leverage
ratio. The Bank Facility fee ranges from 12.5 to 17.5 basis points and the incremental fees for
borrowings under the facility range from LIBOR + 50.0 to 82.5 basis points. The weighted average
interest rate on outstanding borrowings under the Bank Facility at February 28, 2010 was 1.0%.
The Bank Facility contains affirmative and negative covenants, including the following financial
covenants: maximum leverage ratio, minimum coverage interest and rent expense ratio, and a U.S.
Department of Education financial responsibility composite score. In addition, there are covenants
restricting indebtedness, liens, investments, asset transfers and distributions. We were in
compliance with all covenants related to the Bank Facility at February 28, 2010.
Other debt includes $59.7 million of variable rate debt and $12.8 million of fixed rate debt at the
subsidiaries of Apollo Global. The weighted average interest rate of these debt instruments at
February 28, 2010 was 2.9%.
Please refer to Note 7, Fair Value Measurements, for discussion of the fair value of our debt.
17
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 10. Other Liabilities
Other liabilities consist of the following as of February 28, 2010 and August 31, 2009:
February 28, | August 31, | |||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Deferred rent and other lease incentives |
$ | 75,834 | $ | 71,579 | ||||
Reserve for uncertain tax positions |
63,594 | 97,619 | ||||||
Other |
68,720 | 64,838 | ||||||
Total other liabilities |
208,148 | 234,036 | ||||||
Less current portion |
(98,630 | ) | (133,887 | ) | ||||
Total other long-term liabilities |
$ | 109,518 | $ | 100,149 | ||||
Deferred rent and other lease incentives represent amounts included in lease agreements and are
amortized on a straight-line basis over the term of the leases. Refer to Note 11, Income Taxes, for
discussion of our uncertain tax positions.
Note 11. Income Taxes
We exercise significant judgment in determining our income tax provision due to transactions,
credits and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. Please refer to our
significant accounting policies included in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K for further
discussion.
During the six months ended February 28, 2010, our unrecognized tax benefits decreased by $24.6
million, excluding interest and penalties, primarily as a result of settling our Internal Revenue
Code Section 162(m) issue related to stock option compensation as discussed below. This decrease
was partially offset by an increase in our unrecognized tax benefits as a result of tax positions
taken during the six months ended February 28, 2010 related to state taxes.
As of February 28, 2010, we had total uncertain tax positions of $63.6 million, including accrued
interest and penalties of $3.9 million, of which $50.8 million is included in other current
liabilities in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. We believe that it is reasonably possible
that this portion of our uncertain tax positions could be resolved or settled within the next 12
months. The current portion of our uncertain tax positions principally relates to amounts accrued
related to allocation and apportionment of our income amongst various state and local
jurisdictions. The entire amount of our unrecognized tax benefits would favorably affect our
effective rate if ultimately recognized.
Internal Revenue Service Audits
An audit relating to our U.S. federal income tax returns for fiscal years 2003 through 2005
commenced in September 2006. In February 2009, the Internal Revenue Service issued an examination
report and proposed to disallow deductions relating to stock option compensation in excess of the
limitations of Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m). Under Section 162(m), the amount of such
deduction per covered executive officer is limited to $1.0 million per year, except to the extent
the compensation qualifies as performance-based. Compensation attributable to options with revised
measurement dates may not have qualified as performance-based compensation. The Internal Revenue
Service examination report also proposed the additions of penalties and interest. On March 6, 2009,
we commenced administrative proceedings with the Office of Appeals of the Internal Revenue Service
challenging the proposed adjustments, including penalties and interest. On November 25, 2009, we
executed a Closing Agreement with the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals to settle this
matter. The settlement resolves only the disputed tax issues between the Internal Revenue Service
and us and is not an admission by us of liability, wrongdoing, legal compliance or non-compliance
for any other purpose.
We accrued an additional $0.5 million of interest during the first quarter of fiscal year 2010,
resulting in a total accrual, prior to the settlement, of $50.5 million included in our reserve for
uncertain tax positions relating to this issue. As a result of this settlement, we reclassified
$27.3 million to income taxes payable in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of November
30, 2009. We paid $22.6 million during the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 and we expect to pay
the remainder by the end of fiscal year 2010. The remaining accrual of $23.2 million, relating to
the amount in excess of the settlement, was reversed during the first quarter of fiscal year 2010
through a reduction in the provision for income taxes, a decrease in deferred tax assets, and an
increase in additional paid-in capital in the amounts of $10.2 million, $1.5 million and $11.5
million, respectively.
Based on the agreed upon settlement, we believe that we are entitled to certain deductions related
to stock option compensation that were not claimed on our tax returns for the years ended in 2006
through 2009. During the first quarter of fiscal year 2010, we recorded
18
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
the benefit of these
deductions through provision for income taxes, deferred taxes, and additional paid-in-capital in
the amounts of $1.2 million, $0.9 million, and $16.0 million, respectively. We have submitted
claims to the Internal Revenue Service for the deductions that were not taken on our tax returns
for the years ended in 2006, 2007, and 2008. We intend to claim the deductions related to stock
option compensation in fiscal year 2009 on our tax return for the year ended in 2009.
During fiscal year 2009, the Internal Revenue Service commenced an examination of our tax returns
for the years ended in 2006, 2007, and 2008. In addition, we are subject to numerous ongoing audits
by state, local, and foreign tax authorities. Although we believe our tax accruals to be
reasonable, the final determination of tax audits in the U.S. or abroad and any related litigation
could be materially different from our historical income tax provisions and accruals.
Note 12. Shareholders Equity
The following tables detail changes in shareholders equity during the six months ended February
28, 2010 and 2009:
Treasury | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common Stock | Stock | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Class A | Class B | Additional | Class A | Other | Total Apollo | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stated | Stated | Paid-in | Retained | Comprehensive | Shareholders | Noncontrolling | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | Value | Value | Capital | Stated Value | Earnings | Loss | Equity | Interests | Total Equity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance as of August 31, 2009 |
$ | 103 | $ | 1 | $ | 1,139 | $ | (2,022,623 | ) | $ | 3,195,043 | $ | (13,740 | ) | $ | 1,159,923 | $ | 64,690 | $ | 1,224,613 | ||||||||||||||||
Treasury stock purchases |
| | | (201,111 | ) | | | (201,111 | ) | | (201,111 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock issued under stock
purchase plans |
| | 133 | 2,619 | | | 2,752 | | 2,752 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock issued under stock
option plans |
| | (4,508 | ) | 10,323 | | | 5,815 | | 5,815 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tax shortfall of stock options
exercised |
| | (690 | ) | | | | (690 | ) | | (690 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tax benefit related to IRS
dispute settlement |
| | 27,484 | | | | 27,484 | | 27,484 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation |
| | 29,115 | | | | 29,115 | | 29,115 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Currency translation
adjustment, net of tax |
| | | | | (16,382 | ) | (16,382 | ) | (2,663 | ) | (19,045 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
| | | | 332,748 | | 332,748 | (2,102 | ) | 330,646 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance as of February 28, 2010 |
$ | 103 | $ | 1 | $ | 52,673 | $ | (2,210,792 | ) | $ | 3,527,791 | $ | (30,122 | ) | $ | 1,339,654 | $ | 59,925 | $ | 1,399,579 | ||||||||||||||||
Treasury | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common Stock | Stock | Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Class A | Class B | Additional | Class A | Other | Total Apollo | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stated | Stated | Paid-in | Retained | Comprehensive | Shareholders | Noncontrolling | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value | Value | Capital | Stated Value | Earnings | Loss | Equity | Interests | Total Equity | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance as of August 31, 2008 |
$ | 103 | $ | 1 | $ | | $ | (1,757,277 | ) | $ | 2,595,340 | $ | (3,781 | ) | $ | 834,386 | $ | 11,779 | $ | 846,165 | ||||||||||||||||
Treasury stock purchases |
| | | (2,505 | ) | | | (2,505 | ) | | (2,505 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock issued under stock
purchase plans |
| | 10 | 2,710 | | | 2,720 | | 2,720 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock issued under stock
option plans |
| | (18,945 | ) | 111,327 | 1,384 | | 93,766 | | 93,766 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tax benefits of stock options
exercised |
| | 9,514 | | | | 9,514 | | 9,514 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation |
| | 31,358 | | | | 31,358 | | 31,358 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Currency translation
adjustment, net of tax |
| | | | | (7,655 | ) | (7,655 | ) | (2,252 | ) | (9,907 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized investment loss,
net of tax |
| | | | | (1,322 | ) | (1,322 | ) | | (1,322 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other, net |
| | | | | | | (107 | ) | (107 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
| | | | 305,706 | | 305,706 | (322 | ) | 305,384 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance as of February 28, 2009 |
$ | 103 | $ | 1 | $ | 21,937 | $ | (1,645,745 | ) | $ | 2,902,430 | $ | (12,758 | ) | $ | 1,265,968 | $ | 9,098 | $ | 1,275,066 | ||||||||||||||||
Share Reissuances
During the three months ended February 28, 2010 and 2009, we issued approximately 0.1 million
shares and 1.3 million shares, respectively, and during the six months ended February 28, 2010 and
2009, we issued approximately 0.2 million shares and 1.9 million shares, respectively, of our Class
A common stock from our treasury stock as a result of stock option exercises, release of shares
covered by vested restricted stock units, and purchases under our employee stock purchase plan.
19
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Share Repurchases
Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase outstanding shares of Apollo Group Class A
common stock, from time to time, depending on market conditions and other considerations. On
February 18, 2010, our Board of Directors authorized a $500 million increase in the amount
available under our share repurchase program up to an aggregate amount of $1 billion of Apollo
Group Class A common stock. There is no expiration date on the repurchase authorizations and
repurchases occur at our discretion.
During the three months ended February 28, 2010, we repurchased approximately 3.4 million shares of
our Class A common stock at a total cost of approximately $200 million, representing a weighted
average purchase price of $59.61 per share. As of February 28, 2010, approximately $800 million
remained available under our share repurchase authorization. The amount and timing of future share
repurchases, if any, will be made as market and business conditions warrant. Repurchases may be
made on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions, pursuant to the applicable
Securities and Exchange Commission rules, and may include repurchases pursuant to Securities and
Exchange Commission Rule 10b5-1 nondiscretionary trading programs.
In connection with the release of vested shares of restricted stock, we repurchased approximately
2,000 shares for $0.1 million and 19,000 shares for $1.1 million during the three and six months
ended February 28, 2010, respectively. During the six months ended February 28, 2009, we
repurchased approximately 36,000 shares for $2.5 million. These repurchases relate to tax
withholding requirements on the restricted stock units and do not fall under the repurchase program
described above, and therefore do not reduce the amount that is available for repurchase under that
program.
Note 13. Earnings Per Share
Apollo Group Common Stock
Our outstanding shares consist of Apollo Group Class A and Class B common stock. Our Articles of
Incorporation treat the declaration of dividends on the Apollo Group Class A and Class B common
stock in an identical manner. As such, both the Apollo Group Class A and Class B common stock are
included in the calculation of our earnings per share.
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding includes the incremental effect of shares that would be
issued upon the assumed exercise of stock options and the vesting and release of restricted stock
units. The following provides a reconciliation of the basic and diluted earnings per share
computations for our common stock for the periods indicated:
Three Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Net Income | Weighted | Net Income | Weighted | |||||||||||||||||||||
Attributable to | Average | Per Share | Attributable to | Average | Per Share | |||||||||||||||||||
(in thousands, except per share data) | Apollo | Shares | Amount | Apollo | Shares | Amount | ||||||||||||||||||
Basic income per share attributable to Apollo |
$ | 92,606 | 154,119 | $ | 0.60 | $ | 125,346 | 160,153 | $ | 0.78 | ||||||||||||||
Effect of dilutive securities: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock options(1) |
| 808 | | | 2,356 | (0.01 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
Restricted stock units(2) |
| 241 | | | 248 | | ||||||||||||||||||
Diluted income per share attributable to Apollo |
$ | 92,606 | 155,168 | $ | 0.60 | $ | 125,346 | 162,757 | $ | 0.77 | ||||||||||||||
Six Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Net Income | Weighted | Net Income | Weighted | |||||||||||||||||||||
Attributable to | Average | Per Share | Attributable to | Average | Per Share | |||||||||||||||||||
(in thousands, except per share data) | Apollo | Shares | Amount | Apollo | Shares | Amount | ||||||||||||||||||
Basic income per share attributable to Apollo |
$ | 332,748 | 154,473 | $ | 2.15 | $ | 305,706 | 159,643 | $ | 1.91 | ||||||||||||||
Effect of dilutive securities: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock options(1) |
| 927 | (0.01 | ) | | 1,932 | (0.02 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Restricted stock units(2) |
| 221 | | | 231 | | ||||||||||||||||||
Diluted income per share attributable to Apollo |
$ | 332,748 | 155,621 | $ | 2.14 | $ | 305,706 | 161,806 | $ | 1.89 | ||||||||||||||
20
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
(1) | For the three months ended February 28, 2010 and 2009, approximately 5,232,000 and 324,000, respectively, and for the six months ended February 28, 2010 and 2009, approximately 4,875,000 and 1,220,000, respectively, of our stock options outstanding were excluded from the calculation of diluted earnings per share because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. These options could be dilutive in the future. | |
(2) | For the three months ended February 28, 2010 and 2009, approximately 4,000 and 3,000, respectively, and for both the six months ended February 28, 2010 and 2009, approximately 3,000 of our restricted stock units were excluded from the calculation of diluted earnings per share because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. These restricted stock units could be dilutive in the future. |
Note 14. Share-Based Compensation
The table below details share-based compensation expense for the three and six months ended February 28, 2010 and 2009:
Three Months Ended February 28, | Six Months Ended February 28, | |||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Instructional costs and services |
$ | 5,494 | $ | 4,652 | $ | 9,633 | $ | 8,680 | ||||||||
Selling and promotional |
2,053 | 1,571 | 4,320 | 3,023 | ||||||||||||
General and administrative |
7,414 | 10,016 | 15,162 | 19,655 | ||||||||||||
Share-based compensation expense |
$ | 14,961 | $ | 16,239 | $ | 29,115 | $ | 31,358 | ||||||||
In accordance with our Apollo Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 2000 Stock Incentive Plan, during
the three and six months ended February 28, 2010, we granted approximately 9,000 and 44,000 stock
options, respectively, that had weighted average grant date fair value of $23.88 and $23.19 per
option, respectively. The weighted average exercise price of these options was $59.88 and $58.65,
respectively. As of February 28, 2010, there was approximately $61.6 million of total unrecognized
share-based compensation expense, net of forfeitures, related to unvested stock options.
In accordance with our Apollo Group, Inc. Amended and Restated 2000 Stock Incentive Plan, during
the three and six months ended February 28, 2010, we granted approximately 95,000 and 114,000
restricted stock units, respectively, that had weighted average grant date fair value of $60.49 and
$60.35 per unit, respectively. As of February 28, 2010, there was approximately $39.8 million of
total unrecognized share-based compensation expense, net of forfeitures, related to unvested
restricted stock units.
Note 15. Commitments and Contingencies
Contingencies Related to Litigation and Other Proceedings
The following is a description of pending litigation, settlements, and other proceedings that fall
outside the scope of ordinary and routine litigation incidental to our business.
Pending Litigation and Settlements
Incentive Compensation False Claims Act Lawsuit
On August 29, 2003, we were notified that a qui tam action had been filed against us on March 7,
2003, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California by two then-current
employees on behalf of themselves and the federal government. When the federal government declines
to intervene in a qui tam action, as it has done in this case, the relators may elect to pursue the
litigation on behalf of the federal government and, if they are successful, are entitled to receive
a portion of the federal governments recovery. The qui tam action alleges, among other things,
violations of the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1) and (2), by University of Phoenix
through submission of a knowingly false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval, and submission
of knowingly false records or statements to get a false or fraudulent claim paid or approved in
connection with federal student aid programs. The qui tam action also asserts that University of
Phoenix improperly compensates its employees. Specifically, the relators allege that our entry
21
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
into
Program Participation Agreements with the U.S. Department of Education under Title IV of the Higher
Education Act, as reauthorized, constitutes a false claim because we did not intend to comply with
the applicable employee compensation requirements and, therefore, we should be required to pay to
the U.S. Department of Education treble the amount of costs incurred by the U.S. Department of
Education in student loan defaults, student loan subsidies and student financial aid grants from
January 1997 to the present, plus statutory penalties and forfeiture amounts. We believe that at
all relevant times our compensation programs and practices were in compliance with the applicable
legal requirements. Under the District Courts current Scheduling Order, trial was set for March
2010.
In September 2009, the parties to the action, along with the U.S. Department of Justice,
participated in a private mediation in which the parties reached an agreement in principle
regarding the financial terms of a potential settlement. During the fourth quarter of fiscal year
2009, based on the settlement discussions to resolve this matter, we recorded a pre-tax charge of
$80.5 million which represented our best estimate of the loss related to this matter.
The settlement was finalized by all parties on December 14, 2009. The agreement makes clear that we
do not acknowledge, admit or concede any liability, wrongdoing, noncompliance or violation as a
result of the settlement. Under the terms of the agreement, we paid $67.5 million to the United
States in December 2009. Under a separate agreement, we paid $11.0 million in attorneys fees to
the plaintiffs, as required by the False Claims Act, in December 2009. The remaining portion of the
$80.5 million pre-tax charge recorded in fiscal year 2009 represented our estimate of future legal
costs as of August 31, 2009. On December 17, 2009, the Court entered the order dismissing the
lawsuit with prejudice.
Securities Class Action
In October 2004, three class action complaints were filed in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Arizona. The District Court consolidated the three pending class action complaints
under the caption In re Apollo Group, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. CV04-2147-PHX-JAT and a
consolidated class action complaint was filed on May 16, 2005 by the lead plaintiff. The
consolidated complaint named us, Todd S. Nelson, Kenda B. Gonzales and Daniel E. Bachus as
defendants. On March 1, 2007, by stipulation and order of the Court, Daniel E. Bachus was dismissed
as a defendant from the case. Lead plaintiff represents a class of our shareholders who acquired
their shares between February 27, 2004 and September 14, 2004. The complaint alleges violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated under
the Act by us for defendants allegedly material false and misleading statements in connection with
our failure to publicly disclose the contents of a preliminary U.S. Department of Education program
review report. The case proceeded to trial on November 14, 2007. On January 16, 2008, the jury
returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs awarding damages of up to $5.55 for each share of
common stock in the class suit, plus pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. The class shares are
those purchased after February 27, 2004 and still owned on September 14, 2004. The judgment was
entered on January 30, 2008, subject to an automatic stay until February 13, 2008. On February 13,
2008, the District Court granted our motion to stay execution of the judgment pending resolution of
our motions for post-trial relief, which were also filed on February 13, 2008, provided that we
post a bond in the amount of $95.0 million. On February 19, 2008, we posted the $95.0 million bond
with the District Court. Oral arguments on our post-trial motions occurred on August 4, 2008,
during which the District Court vacated the earlier judgment based on the jury verdict and entered
judgment in favor of Apollo and the other defendants. The $95.0 million bond posted in February was
subsequently released on August 11, 2008. Plaintiffs lawyers filed a Notice of Appeal with the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on August 29, 2008. A hearing before a panel of the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals took place on March 3, 2010. A ruling has not yet been issued by the Court.
As a result of the jury verdict awarded in favor of the plaintiffs, we recorded a charge for
estimated damages of $168.4 million and additional interest charges of $1.6 million in the second
and third quarters of fiscal year 2008, respectively. In the fourth quarter of
fiscal year 2008, we subsequently reversed the original estimated charge and related pre- and
post-judgment interest totaling $170.0 million because the District Court vacated the earlier
judgment and entered judgment in favor of Apollo. In connection with this matter, we currently
estimate our range of loss to be between zero and $225.0 million which was based on similar
assumptions used to estimate the original charge, including if the plaintiffs were to prevail in a
judgment on appeal. In the second quarter of fiscal year 2010, based on settlement discussions to
resolve this matter, we recorded a pre-tax charge of $44.5 million in accrued liabilities. The
actual amount of this loss will not be known until a final settlement, if any, is reached or the
litigation is concluded.
The outcome of this legal proceeding is uncertain because of the many questions of fact and law
that may arise. A settlement or other disposition of this litigation could be for an amount greater
than our reserve and could have a material and adverse affect on our business, financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows.
22
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Barnett Derivative Action
On April 24, 2006, Larry Barnett, one of our shareholders, filed a shareholder derivative complaint
on behalf of Apollo. The allegations in the complaint pertain to the matters that were the subject
of the investigation performed by the U.S. Department of Education that led to the issuance of the
U.S. Department of Educations February 5, 2004 Program Review Report. The complaint was filed in
the Superior Court for the State of Arizona, Maricopa County and is entitled Barnett v. John Blair
et al, Case Number CV2006-051558. In the complaint, plaintiff asserts a derivative claim, on our
behalf, for breaches of fiduciary duty against the following nine of our current or former officers
and directors: John M. Blair, Dino J. DeConcini, Hedy F. Govenar, Kenda B. Gonzales, Todd S.
Nelson, Laura Palmer Noone, John R. Norton III, John G. Sperling and Peter V. Sperling. Plaintiff
contends that we are entitled to recover from these individuals the amount of the settlement that
we paid to the U.S. Department of Education and our losses (both litigation expenses and any
damages awarded) stemming from the federal securities class actions pending against us in Federal
District Court as described above under Securities Class Action. On August 21, 2006, we filed a
Motion to Stay the case pending the resolution of the federal Securities Class Action.
On October 10, 2006, plaintiff subsequently amended his complaint to include new allegations
pertaining to our alleged backdating of stock option grants to Todd S. Nelson, Kenda B. Gonzales,
Laura Palmer Noone, John G. Sperling and three additional defendants: J. Jorge Klor de Alva, Jerry
F. Noble and Anthony F. Digiovanni. This First Amended Complaint adds allegations that the
individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties to us and that certain of them were unjustly
enriched by their receipt of backdated stock option grants. The plaintiff seeks, among other
things, an award of unspecified damages and reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys
fees.
On November 10, 2006, we filed an Amended Motion to Stay the action pending resolution of the
federal Securities Class Action and the Special Committees investigation into the allegations of
stock option backdating. On January 29, 2007, the Court granted the Amended Motion to Stay pending
the resolution of the trial in the federal Securities Class Action.
On March 7, 2008, following the entry of judgment in the federal Securities Class Action, we filed
a motion to stay discovery regarding the U.S. Department of Education claims pending the
disposition of post-trial motions in the federal Securities Class Action and informed the Superior
Court of an imminent settlement regarding the stock option claims. On March 10, 2008, the Superior
Court stayed the stock option claims. On September 17, 2008, the Superior Court dismissed the stock
option backdating claims. The settlement does not apply to the U.S. Department of Education claims.
With respect to the U.S. Department of Education claims, on April 10, 2008, the plaintiff filed his
Second Amended Complaint. In addition to the damages previously sought, plaintiff added a request
that we recover from defendants the expenses associated with the ongoing qui tam action pending in
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. On May 9, 2008, we moved for a
continued stay of Counts 1-2 and dismissal of Counts 3-5 added in the Second Amended Complaint. On
July 30, 2008, the Superior Court dismissed Counts 3-5, and stayed Counts 1-2, until the next
pre-trial conference. At the continued pre-trial conference on October 27, 2008, the Superior Court
lifted the discovery stay and set certain long-range deadlines for completion of discovery,
dispositive motions, and disclosure of experts, the earliest of which is May 31, 2010. A trial, if
any, is not likely to occur until some time in 2011.
On April 3, 2009, we filed a motion seeking the appointment of an independent panel consisting of
Dr. Roy A. Herberger, Jr. and Stephen J. Giusto. The Court granted our motion on July 31, 2009.
On March 22, 2010, the parties filed a stipulation of settlement with the Court wherein they agreed
to resolve this action. The proposed stipulation of settlement requires the Company to implement a
series of corporate governance reforms and pay an immaterial amount to the plaintiffs counsel for
their fees and expenses. Based on information available to us at present, our management does not
expect a material adverse effect on our business to result from this action.
Teamsters Local Union Putative Class Action
On November 2, 2006, the Teamsters Local 617 Pension and Welfare Funds filed a class action
complaint purporting to represent a class of shareholders who purchased our stock between November
28, 2001 and October 18, 2006. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Arizona, is entitled Teamsters Local 617 Pension & Welfare Funds v. Apollo Group, Inc. et al., Case
23
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Number 06-cv-02674-RCB, and alleges that we and certain of our current and former directors and
officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder by purportedly making misrepresentations concerning our stock option
granting policies and practices and related accounting. The defendants are Apollo Group, Inc., J.
Jorge Klor de Alva, Daniel E. Bachus, John M. Blair, Dino J. DeConcini, Kenda B. Gonzales, Hedy F.
Govenar, Brian E. Mueller, Todd S. Nelson, Laura Palmer Noone, John R. Norton III, John G. Sperling
and Peter V. Sperling. Plaintiff seeks unstated compensatory damages and other relief. On January
3, 2007, other shareholders, through their separate attorneys, filed motions seeking appointment as
lead plaintiff and approval of their designated counsel as lead counsel to pursue this action. On
September 11, 2007, the Court appointed The Pension Trust Fund for Operating Engineers as lead
plaintiff and approved lead plaintiffs selection of lead counsel and liaison counsel. Lead
plaintiff filed an amended complaint on November 23, 2007, asserting the same legal claims as the
original complaint and adding claims for violations of Section 20A of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and allegations of breach of fiduciary duties and civil conspiracy.
On January 22, 2008, all defendants filed motions to dismiss. On March 31, 2009, the Court
dismissed the case with prejudice as to Daniel Bachus, Hedy Govenar, Brian E. Mueller, Dino J.
DeConcini, and Laura Palmer Noone. The Court also dismissed the case as to John Sperling and Peter
Sperling, but granted plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint against them. Finally, the
Court dismissed all of plaintiffs claims concerning misconduct before November 2001 and all of the
state law claims for conspiracy and breach of fiduciary duty. On April 30, 2009, plaintiffs filed
their Second Amended Complaint, which alleges similar claims for alleged securities fraud against
the same defendants. On June 15, 2009, all defendants filed another motion to dismiss the Second
Amended Complaint. On February 22, 2010, the Court partially granted the plaintiffs motion for
reconsideration, but withheld a final determination on the individual defendants pending the
Courts ruling on the motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint.
Discovery in this case has not yet begun. Because of the many questions of fact and law that may
arise, the outcome of this legal proceeding is uncertain at this point. Based on information
available to us at present, we cannot reasonably estimate a range of loss for this action and
accordingly have not accrued any liability associated with this action.
Patent Infringement Litigation
On March 3, 2008, Digital-Vending Services International Inc. filed a complaint against University
of Phoenix and Apollo Group Inc., as well as Capella Education Company, Laureate Education Inc.,
and Walden University Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The
complaint alleges that we and the other defendants have infringed and are infringing various
patents relating to managing courseware in a shared use operating environment. We filed an answer
to the complaint on May 27, 2008, in which we denied that Digital-Vending Services Internationals
patents were duly and lawfully issued, and asserted defenses of non-infringement and patent
invalidity, among others. We also asserted a counterclaim seeking a declaratory judgment that the
patents are invalid, unenforceable, and not infringed by us. Together with the other defendants, we
filed a motion to transfer venue from the Eastern District of Texas to Washington, D.C. on February
27, 2009. On September 30, 2009, the Court granted plaintiffs motion to transfer the case to the
Eastern District of Virginia and denied the defendants motion to transfer the case to the District
of Columbia. Discovery in the case is ongoing. A scheduling order has been issued with a trial date
set for November 1, 2010.
On March 18, 2010, we filed our opening claim construction brief and a motion for summary judgment
based on the indefiniteness of the Digital-Vending Services International patent claims. Because of
the many questions of fact and law that may arise, the outcome of this legal proceeding is
uncertain at this point. Based on information available to us at present, we cannot reasonably
estimate a range of loss for this action and accordingly have not accrued any liability associated
with this action.
Student Loan Class Action
On December 9, 2008, three former University of Phoenix students filed a complaint against Apollo
Group, Inc. and University of Phoenix in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Arkansas. The complaint alleges that with regard to students who dropped from their courses shortly
after enrolling, University of Phoenix improperly returned the entire amount of the students
undisbursed federal loan funds to the lender. The students purport to be bringing the complaint on
behalf of themselves and a proposed class of similarly-situated student loan borrowers. On January
21, 2009, the plaintiffs voluntarily filed a dismissal without prejudice to re-filing. The
plaintiffs then filed a similar complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California (Western Division Los Angeles) on February 5, 2009. We filed an answer denying all of
the asserted claims on March 30, 2009. Under the District Courts current Scheduling Order, trial
is set for October 2010. The matter is currently in discovery. The plaintiffs filed their motion
for class certification and an amended complaint on July 14, 2009. On March 22, 2010, the Court
denied plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification. The Courts action encompasses a denial to
certify the class action for all purported nationwide classes and California
24
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
sub-classes. As a
result, the case will now proceed on an individual plaintiff basis and, absent a reversal of this
denial of class certification, we do not expect any material adverse impact from the lawsuit.
Brodale Employment and False Claims Lawsuit
On August 1, 2008, former employee, Stephen Lee Brodale, filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court
in San Diego against Apollo, University of Phoenix, and several individual employees. The complaint
alleges various employment claims and also includes claims under the Federal and California false
claims acts. The U.S. Department of Justice declined to participate in the lawsuit and it was
served on the Company on August 10, 2009. On September 16, 2009, the Court dismissed the employment
claims without prejudice, upon joint motion by the parties, so that they could proceed to binding
arbitration. On September 14, 2009, we filed a motion to dismiss the remaining false claims act
allegations. The Court granted our motion and dismissed the remaining claims on November 6, 2009.
On January 5, 2010, plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal with the Ninth Circuit. Plaintiff
subsequently agreed to voluntarily dismiss the appeal and the Court ordered the appeal dismissed on
February 10, 2010.
Wage and Hour Class Actions
During fiscal year 2009 and 2010, five lawsuits, each styled as a class action, were commenced by
various former and current employees against Apollo and/or University of Phoenix alleging wage and
hour claims for failure to pay minimum wages and overtime and certain other violations. These
lawsuits are as follows:
| Juric. Action filed April 3, 2009, by former employee Dejan Juric in California State Court in Los Angeles. We filed an answer denying all of the asserted claims on May 4, 2009 and then removed the case to the Federal District Court in Los Angeles. The matter is currently in discovery. On December 30, 2009, plaintiff filed an amended complaint dismissing the California class allegations and inserting nation-wide class allegations under the Fair Labor Standards Act. On February 16, 2010, we filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative to stay or transfer, the case based on the previously filed Sabol action. | ||
| Sabol. Action filed July 31, 2009, by several former employees in Federal District Court in Philadelphia. We filed an answer denying the asserted claim on September 29, 2009. During the course of the action, all but one of the former employees voluntarily opted out of the lawsuit. On January 24, 2010, we filed a motion for partial summary judgment with respect to plaintiffs claim that the Academic Counselor position is incorrectly classified as exempt. On February 9, 2010, plaintiff filed a Rule 56(f) motion seeking leave to conduct additional discovery before response to our motion for partial summary judgment. On March 3, 2010, the Court granted plaintiff leave to conduct additional discovery on issues related to the motion for partial summary judgment until April 5, 2010. The Court also ordered plaintiff to file his response to the motion for summary judgment on or before April 20, 2010. On February 15, 2010, plaintiff filed a Motion for Class Certification and we filed our opposition on March 5, 2010. | ||
| Tranchita. Action filed August 10, 2009, by several former employees in Federal District Court in Chicago. On September 2, 2009, we filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative to stay or transfer, the case based on the previously filed Sabol action. The plaintiffs subsequently agreed to dismiss their class allegations and settle the case for an immaterial amount. On February 16, 2010, the parties filed a Notice of Settlement with the Court and are currently finalizing the settlement agreements before filing a request for dismissal with the Court. | ||
| Davis. Action filed September 28, 2009, by former employee Adonijah Davis in Federal District Court in Tampa, Florida. On November 2, 2009, we filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative to stay or transfer, the case based on the previously filed Sabol action. On November 17, 2009, plaintiff filed an amended complaint removing the class action allegations and electing to proceed on a single plaintiff basis. As a result, the Court denied our motion to dismiss as moot on November 18, 2009. On January 28, 2010, the parties agreed to settle the case for an immaterial amount. The parties are currently finalizing the settlement agreement before filing a request for dismissal with the Court. | ||
| Adoma. Action filed January 8, 2010 by Diane Adoma in United States District Court, Eastern District of California. On March 5, 2010, we filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative to stay or transfer, the case based on the previously filed Sabol and Juric actions. |
25
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Because of the many questions of fact and law that may arise, the outcome of these legal
proceedings is uncertain at this point. Based on information available to us at present, we cannot
reasonably estimate a range of loss for these actions and, accordingly, we have not accrued any
liability associated with these actions.
Other
We are subject to various claims and contingencies in the ordinary course of business, including
those related to regulation, litigation, business transactions, employee-related matters and taxes,
among others. We do not believe any of these are material for separate disclosure.
Regulatory and Other Legal Matters
Student Financial Aid
All U.S. federal financial aid programs are established by Title IV of the Higher Education Act and
regulations promulgated thereunder. In August 2008, the Higher Education Act was reauthorized
through September 30, 2013 by the Higher Education Opportunity Act.
The Higher Education Opportunity Act specifies the manner in which the U.S. Department of Education
reviews institutions for eligibility and certification to participate in Title IV programs. Every
educational institution involved in Title IV programs must be certified to participate and is
required to periodically renew this certification.
University of Phoenix was recertified in November 2009 and entered into a new Title IV Program
Participation Agreement which expires on December 31, 2012.
Western International University was recertified in October 2003 and its current certification for
participation in Title IV programs expired on June 30, 2009. In March 2009, Western International
University submitted its Title IV recertification application to the U.S. Department of Education
and its eligibility continues on a month-to-month basis until the U.S. Department of Education
completes its review of the application and issues its decision. We have no reason to believe that
the application will not be renewed in due course.
U.S. Department of Education Program Review
The U.S. Department of Education periodically reviews institutions participating in Title IV
programs for compliance with applicable standards and regulations. In February 2009, the U.S.
Department of Education performed a program review of University of Phoenixs policies and
procedures involving Title IV programs. On December 31, 2009, University of Phoenix received the
U.S. Department of Educations Program Review Report, which is a preliminary report of the U.S.
Department of Educations findings. We are in the process of finalizing our response to these findings
and plan to submit them shortly. The U.S. Department of Education will review our response and will issue a Final
Program Review Determination letter that will confirm any required corrective action or amounts
owed to the U.S. Department of Education.
The report contains six findings and one concern. Three of the findings generally relate to our
procedures for determining the date on which a student withdraws from University of Phoenix, one of
which cites exceptions to the U.S. Department of Educations rules
regarding the timing of returning unearned Title IV funds. No errors were identified in our
calculation of the amounts of Title IV funds to be returned. Another finding relates to isolated
clerical errors in verifying student-supplied information. The two remaining findings were self
reported by University of Phoenix in its 2008 Annual Compliance Audit. These involve our
calculation of student financial need in certain cases without taking into account tuition and fee
waivers and discounts, principally for employees of Apollo Group and its affiliates eligible for
tuition assistance, and the use of Title IV funds for non-program purposes such as transcript,
application and late fees.
In addition, the U.S. Department of Education expressed a concern that some students enroll and
begin attending classes before completely understanding the implications of enrollment, including
their eligibility for student financial aid. The U.S. Department of Education stated its belief
that prospective students would be better served if they were more extensively counseled prior to
incurring
26
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
any tuition liability about total program charges, the number of credits that are
transferable, the total number of credits required to complete their chosen program and the
financial aid available for each academic year of the program.
We believe that our liability resulting from these findings will be approximately $1.5 million,
which has been accrued in our February 28, 2010 financial statements. In addition, the U.S.
Department of Educations regulations require certain institutions to post a letter of credit where
a program review report cites untimely return of unearned Title IV funds for more than 10% of the
sampled students. Absent relief from this requirement or other instruction by the U.S. Department
of Education, University of Phoenix will be required to post a letter of credit within 30 days of
the issuance of the Final Program Review Determination letter in the amount of approximately $125
million, to be maintained until at least September 30, 2011.
Securities and Exchange Commission Informal Inquiry
During October 2009, we received notification from the Enforcement Division of the Securities and
Exchange Commission indicating that they had commenced an informal inquiry into our revenue
recognition practices. Based on the information and documents that the Securities and Exchange
Commission has requested from us and/or our auditors, which relate to our revenue recognition
practices and other matters, including our policies and practices relating to student refunds, the
return of Title IV funds to lenders and bad debt reserves, the eventual scope, duration and outcome
of the inquiry cannot be predicted at this time. We are cooperating fully with the Securities and
Exchange Commission in connection with the inquiry.
Internal Revenue Service Audits
Please refer to Note 11, Income Taxes, for discussion of Internal Revenue Service audits.
Note 16. Segment Reporting
We operate primarily in the education industry. We have organized our segments using a combination
of factors primarily focusing on the type of educational services provided and products delivered.
Our seven operating segments are managed in the following four reportable segments:
| University of Phoenix; | ||
| Apollo Global BPP; | ||
| Apollo Global Other; and | ||
| Other Schools. |
In the second quarter of fiscal year 2010, we began presenting Insight Schools assets and
liabilities as held for sale and discontinued operations. Insight Schools was previously reported
as its own reportable segment. As Insight Schools is presented as discontinued operations in our
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income for all periods presented, we have revised our
financial information by reportable segment to conform to our current presentation.
The Other Schools segment includes Western International University, IPD, CFFP and Meritus. The
Corporate caption in our segment reporting includes adjustments to reconcile segment results to
consolidated results, which primarily consist of net revenue and corporate charges that are not
allocated to our reportable segments. Please refer to our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K for
further discussion of our segments.
27
Table of Contents
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
A summary of financial information by reportable segment is as follows:
Three Months Ended February 28, | Six Months Ended February 28, | |||||||||||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Net revenue: |
||||||||||||||||
University of Phoenix |
$ | 977,476 | $ | 829,276 | $ | 2,099,846 | $ | 1,742,484 | ||||||||
Apollo Global: |
||||||||||||||||
BPP |
53,647 | | 142,320 | | ||||||||||||
Other |
12,493 | 14,062 | 28,925 | 31,064 | ||||||||||||
Total Apollo Global |
66,140 | 14,062 | 171,245 | 31,064 | ||||||||||||
Other Schools |
26,720 | 25,618 | 57,904 | 57,607 | ||||||||||||
Corporate |
| 587 | | 1,670 | ||||||||||||
Total net revenue |
$ | 1,070,336 | $ | 869,543 | $ | 2,328,995 | $ | 1,832,825 | ||||||||
Operating income (loss): |
||||||||||||||||
University of Phoenix |
$ | 246,418 | $ | 230,062 | $ | 637,433 | $ | 540,275 | ||||||||
Apollo Global: |
||||||||||||||||
BPP |
(10,793 | ) | | 4,809 | | |||||||||||
Other |
(5,951 | ) | (2,010 | ) | (7,823 | ) | (1,271 | ) | ||||||||
Total Apollo Global |
(16,744 | ) | (2,010 | ) | (3,014 | ) | (1,271 | ) | ||||||||
Other Schools |
(2,036 | ) | (1,324 | ) | 713 | 3,229 | ||||||||||
Corporate(1) |
(54,648 | ) | (15,618 | ) | (69,083 | ) | (21,046 | ) | ||||||||
Total operating income |
172,990 | 211,110 | 566,049 | 521,187 | ||||||||||||
Reconciling items: |
||||||||||||||||
Interest income |
525 | 3,430 | 1,457 | 8,807 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(3,220 | ) | (621 | ) | (6,128 | ) | (2,050 | ) | ||||||||
Other, net |
(79 | ) | (201 | ) | (749 | ) | (2,633 | ) | ||||||||
Income from continuing operations
before income taxes |
$ | 170,216 | $ | 213,718 | $ | 560,629 | $ | 525,311 | ||||||||
(1) | The operating loss for Corporate in both the three and six months ended February 28, 2010 includes the $44.5 million charge associated with the Securities Class Action matter. Refer to Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, for further discussion. |
A summary of our consolidated assets by reportable segment is as follows:
February 28, | August 31, | |||||||
($ in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Assets: |
||||||||
University of Phoenix |
$ | 1,088,659 | $ | 1,112,002 | ||||
Apollo Global: |
||||||||
BPP |
709,824 | 778,416 | ||||||
Other |
127,268 | 133,615 | ||||||
Total Apollo Global |
837,092 | 912,031 | ||||||
Other Schools |
51,218 | 52,100 | ||||||
Insight Schools (1) |
| 26,590 | ||||||
Corporate |
1,023,602 | 1,160,654 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 3,000,571 | $ | 3,263,377 | ||||
(1) | Insight Schools assets are held for sale and included in our Corporate caption as of February 28, 2010 in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Please refer to Note 3, Discontinued Operations, for further discussion. |
28
Table of Contents
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
This Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A)
is intended to help investors understand our results of operations, financial conditions and
present business environment. The MD&A is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in
conjunction with, our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes
included elsewhere in this report. The MD&A is organized as follows:
| Overview: From managements point of view, we discuss the following: |
| An overview of our business and the sectors of the education industry in which we operate; | ||
| Key trends, developments and challenges; and | ||
| Key highlights from the current period. |
| Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates: A discussion of our accounting policies that require critical judgments and estimates. | ||
| Recent Accounting Pronouncements: A discussion of recently issued accounting pronouncements. | ||
| Results of Operations: An analysis of our results of operations as reflected in our condensed consolidated financial statements. | ||
| Liquidity, Capital Resources, and Financial Position: An analysis of cash flows and contractual obligations and other commercial commitments. |
OVERVIEW
Apollo is one of the worlds largest private education providers and has been a provider of
education services for more than 35 years. We offer innovative and distinctive educational programs
and services at the undergraduate, masters and doctoral levels at our various campuses and
learning centers, and online throughout the world. Our principal wholly-owned subsidiaries and
subsidiaries that we control include the following:
| University of Phoenix; | ||
| Apollo Global: |
| BPP Holdings, plc (BPP); | ||
| Universidad de Artes, Ciencias y Comunicación (UNIACC); and | ||
| Universidad Latinoamericana (ULA); |
| Western International University; | ||
| Institute for Professional Development (IPD); | ||
| College for Financial Planning Institutes (CFFP); and | ||
| Meritus University, Inc. (Meritus). |
We also operate online high school programs through our Insight Schools, Inc. (Insight Schools)
wholly-owned subsidiary. In the second quarter of fiscal year 2010, we engaged an investment bank
and proceeded with a formal plan to sell Insight Schools as we determined that the business is no
longer consistent with our long-term strategic objectives. Accordingly, we have presented Insight
Schools as held for sale and as discontinued operations. Refer to Note 3, Discontinued Operations,
in Item 1, Financial Statements, for further discussion.
Substantially all of our net revenue is composed of tuition and fees for educational services. In
fiscal year 2009, University of Phoenix accounted for approximately 95% of our total consolidated
net revenue. University of Phoenix generated 83% of its cash basis revenue for eligible tuition and
fees during fiscal year 2009 from receipt of Title IV financial aid program funds, as calculated
under the 90/10 Rule, including the benefit from the permitted temporary exclusion of revenue
associated with the recently increased annual student loan limits. Following rulemaking and other
guidance from the U.S. Department of Education, we finalized the favorable effect of this temporary
relief for fiscal year 2009 in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010. This temporary relief
expires in July 2011, and excluding this benefit the percentage for University of Phoenix was 86%.
We believe that a critical element of generating successful long-term growth and attractive returns
for our stakeholders is to provide high quality educational products and services for our students
in order for them to maximize the benefits of their educational experience. Accordingly, we are
intensely focused on student success. We are continuously enhancing and expanding our current
service offerings and investing in academic quality. We have developed customized computer programs
for academic quality management, faculty recruitment and training, student tracking, and marketing
to help us more effectively manage toward this objective. We believe we utilize one of the most
comprehensive postsecondary learning assessment programs in the U.S. By enhancing student services,
promoting instructional innovation and improving academic support, we intend to improve student
29
Table of Contents
retention. All of these efforts are designed to help our students stay in school and succeed. In
December 2009, University of Phoenix published its second Academic Annual Report which contains a
variety of comparative performance measures related to student outcomes and University of Phoenix
initiatives related to quality and accountability.
Key Trends, Developments and Challenges
The following circumstances and trends present opportunities, challenges and risks as we work
toward our goal of providing attractive returns for all of our stakeholders:
| Evolving Domestic Postsecondary Education Market. We believe domestic postsecondary education continues to experience a profound shift from traditional undergraduate students (those students living on campus and attending classes full-time) to non-traditional students who work, are raising a family, or are doing both while trying to earn a college degree. This trend continues to provide an opportunity for education providers such as University of Phoenix to provide quality academic programs and services that appeal to non-traditional students. | ||
| Economic Downturn. The U.S. and much of the world economy have been in the midst of an economic downturn. These conditions have contributed to a portion of our recent enrollment growth as an increased number of working learners seek to advance their education to improve their job security or reemployment prospects. One of our challenges is to adequately and effectively service our increased student population without over-building our infrastructure and delivery platform in a manner that might result in excess capacity when the portion of our growth related to the economic downturn subsides. In addition to this impact on our enrollment, the economic downturn has negatively affected our bad debt expense and allowance for doubtful accounts and reduced the availability of state-funded student financial aid as many states face revenue shortfalls. We believe that the availability of state-funded student financial aid will continue to decline, which may negatively impact our enrollment and, to the extent that Title IV funds replace these state funding sources for our students, may negatively impact our 90/10 Rule calculation. | ||
| Regulatory Environment |
| Compliance. Our domestic business is highly regulated by the U.S. Department of Education, the applicable academic accreditation agencies and state education regulatory authorities. Compliance with these regulatory requirements is a significant part of our administrative effort. In August 2008, the U.S. Congress reauthorized the Higher Education Act through 2013 by enacting the Higher Education Opportunity Act, which resulted in a large number of new and modified requirements that ultimately will be implemented through the U.S. Department of Education rulemaking. Final regulations for implementing the Higher Education Opportunity Act provisions were published in October 2009 with an effective date of July 1, 2010. We have been developing and implementing various procedures to enable us to be in compliance with the provisions by the effective date. Additionally, in November 2009, the U.S. Department of Education convened two new negotiated rulemaking teams related to Title IV program integrity issues and foreign school issues. The team addressing program integrity issues, which included representatives of the various higher education constituencies, was unable to reach consensus on all of the rules addressed by that team. Accordingly, under the negotiated rulemaking protocol, the U.S. Department of Education is free to propose rules without regard to the tentative agreement reached regarding certain of the rules. The U.S. Department of Education is expected to issue its proposed regulations for public comment sometime this spring or summer and final regulations prior to November 1, 2010, to be effective July 1, 2011. The proposed program integrity rulemaking addresses numerous topics. The most significant proposals for our business are the following: |
| Modification of the standards relating to the payment of incentive compensation to employees involved in student recruitment and enrollment; and | ||
| Adoption of a definition of gainful employment for purposes of the requirement for Title IV student financial aid that a program of study prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation. |
We cannot predict the form of the rules that ultimately will be proposed by the U.S. Department of Education for public comment, or the form of any final rules that may be adopted by the U.S. Department of Education. If the rules regarding incentive compensation and gainful employment are adopted in the form presented by the U.S. Department of Education in the negotiated rulemaking, they could have a material impact on the manner in which we conduct our business. Compliance with these rules, which if adopted could be effective as early as July 1, |
30
Table of Contents
2011, could reduce our enrollment, increase our cost of doing business, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Refer to Item 1A, Risk Factors, for further discussion of the U.S. Department of Educations proposals. | |||
One requirement of the Higher Education Act, commonly referred to as the 90/10 Rule, applies to proprietary institutions such as the University of Phoenix and Western International University. Under this rule, a proprietary institution will be ineligible to participate in Title IV programs if for any two consecutive fiscal years it derives more than 90% of its cash basis revenue, as defined in the rule, from Title IV programs. An institution that exceeds this limit for any single fiscal year will be placed on provisional certification for two fiscal years and will be subject to additional sanctions. In recent years, the 90/10 Rule percentages for the University of Phoenix have trended closer to 90%. For fiscal year 2009, the percentage for University of Phoenix was 83%, including the benefit from the permitted temporary exclusion of revenue associated with the recently increased annual student loan limits. Following rulemaking and other guidance from the U.S. Department of Education, we finalized the favorable effect of this temporary relief for fiscal year 2009 in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010. This temporary relief expires in July 2011, and excluding this benefit the percentage for University of Phoenix was 86%. | |||
We expect the upward pressure on the 90/10 Rule percentage to continue in fiscal year 2010. University of Phoenix is continuing to implement various measures to reduce the percentage of its cash basis revenue attributable to Title IV funds, including emphasizing employer-paid and other direct-pay education programs, encouraging students to carefully evaluate the amount of necessary Title IV borrowing, and increasing the emphasis on professional development and continuing education. Although we expect that these measures will continue to favorably impact the 90/10 Rule calculation in the future, there is no assurance that these initiatives will be effective or will be adequate to prevent the 90/10 Rule calculation from exceeding 90%. If this calculation exceeds 90% in fiscal year 2010 or future fiscal years, we will need to increase our efforts to reduce the percentage of our cash-basis revenue that is composed of Title IV funding. These efforts, and our other long-term initiatives to impact this calculation, may involve taking measures which increase our operating expenses and/or reduce our revenue. Title IV eligibility is critical to the continued operation of our business. |
| University Orientation Program. University of Phoenix has launched its University Orientation program on a pilot basis. This program is a free, three-week orientation program designed to provide students who have limited or no college experience a better understanding of what is required to be successful at University of Phoenix before starting their degree program and potentially incurring any student loans or other financial aid obligations. The scope of the pilot program has been limited as we continue to evaluate the results of the initiative before making a decision on a broader implementation. If, based on the results of this pilot program, we believe University Orientation will provide a long term benefit to our students and increase our long-term cash flow, we expect to more broadly implement the program. However, in the short-term, the program adversely impacts enrollment, net revenue, operating profit, and cash flow, particularly at the associates level. | ||
| Federal Direct Loan Program. The U.S. Congress is considering a proposal to eliminate the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) and instead require all Title IV student loans to be administered through the Federal Direct Loan Program (FDLP) commencing July 1, 2010. We expect to be able to fully transition from the FFELP program to the FDLP by the proposed July 1, 2010 phase-out date, if necessary. While the adoption of this proposal is not yet certain, we have initiated a formal project to develop and implement administrative capabilities and procedures in advance of the proposed phase-out date for volume processing of loans under the FDLP. If we experience a disruption in our ability to process student loans through the FDLP, either because of administrative challenges on our part or the inability of the U.S. Department of Education to process the increased volume of direct loans on a timely basis, our results of operations and cash flows could be adversely and materially affected. We are currently participating in the FDLP for a portion of our Title IV eligible students. | ||
| Opportunities to Expand into New Markets. We believe that there is a growing demand for high quality education outside the U.S. and that we have capabilities and expertise that can be useful in providing these services beyond our current reach. We believe we can deploy our key capabilities in student services, technology and marketing to expand into new markets to further our mission of providing high quality, accessible education. We intend to actively pursue quality opportunities to partner with and/or acquire existing institutions of higher learning where we believe we can achieve long-term attractive growth and value creation. |
31
Table of Contents
| Integration |
| We continue our efforts to integrate our acquired educational institutions and seek to use our experience to enhance the quality, delivery and student outcomes of their respective education programs. As with all acquisitions, there are significant risks, uncertainties and challenges inherent with integration. If we are unable to adequately integrate and successfully operate our acquired businesses, we may be required to record non-cash impairment charges for certain acquired assets. | ||
| BPP, which we acquired in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009, has been negatively affected by the global economic downturn, and we are still developing and implementing our integration and operating plans for BPP. As of February 28, 2010, BPP had $399.6 million and $131.3 million of goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets, respectively. |
For a more detailed discussion of trends, risks and uncertainties, and our strategic plan, please
refer to our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K, and Item 1A, Risk Factors, included in this report.
Second Quarter of Fiscal Year 2010 Highlights
We experienced the following significant events since the first quarter of fiscal year 2010:
1. | Degreed Enrollment and New Degreed Enrollment Growth. We achieved 15.3% growth in University of Phoenix Degreed Enrollment in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 as compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. University of Phoenix New Degreed Enrollment during the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 increased 9.4% as compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. We believe the enrollment growth is primarily attributable to enhancements in our marketing capabilities, along with continued investments in enhancing and expanding University of Phoenix service offerings and academic quality. A portion of the increase in enrollment growth is due to economic uncertainties, as working learners seek to advance their education to improve their job security or reemployment prospects, and this element of our growth may diminish as the economy and the employment outlook improve in the U.S. Offsetting some of this growth are our growing efforts to identify and enroll students who have a greater chance of succeeding in our rigorous programs. The two primary contributors to this effort are leveraging our marketing analytics to identify and attract those prospective students and our University Orientation program. In addition, the enrollment growth was adversely impacted by the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 having one fewer associates course start date as compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. | ||
2. | Net Revenue Growth. Our net revenue increased 23.1% in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 as compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009 with University of Phoenixs net revenue increasing 17.9% mainly from its Degreed Enrollment growth and selective tuition price increases. Apollo Globals acquisition of BPP in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009 also contributed 6.2 percentage points of the overall increase in consolidated net revenue. | ||
3. | University of Phoenix Academic Annual Report. In December 2009, University of Phoenix published its second Academic Annual Report which contains a variety of comparative performance measures related to student outcomes and university initiatives related to quality and accountability. | ||
4. | Settlement of Incentive Compensation False Claims Act Lawsuit. On December 14, 2009, we entered into an agreement, effective December 11, 2009, to resolve the Incentive Compensation False Claims Act Lawsuit. Under the terms of the agreement, in December 2009, we paid $67.5 million to the United States and, under a separate agreement, we paid $11.0 million in attorneys fees to the relators in this qui tam action, as required by the False Claims Act. The agreement makes clear that we do not acknowledge, admit or concede any liability, wrongdoing, noncompliance or violation as a result of the settlement. Refer to Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for additional information. | ||
5. | University of Phoenix Program Review Report. On December 31, 2009, University of Phoenix received the U.S. Department of Educations Program Review Report associated with a program review conducted in February 2009, which is a preliminary report of the U.S. Department of Educations findings. We are in the process of finalizing our response to these findings and plan to submit them shortly. The U.S. Department of Education will review our response and will issue a Final Program Review Determination letter that will confirm any required corrective action or amounts owed to the U.S. Department of Education. We believe that our liability resulting from the findings will be approximately $1.5 million, which has been accrued in our February 28, 2010 financial statements. In addition, we may be required to post a letter of credit of approximately $125 million within 30 days of the issuance of the Final Program Review Determination letter to be maintained until at least September 30, 2011. Refer to Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for additional information. |
32
Table of Contents
6. | Securities Class Action. In the second quarter of fiscal year 2010, based on settlement discussions to resolve this matter, we recorded a pre-tax charge of $44.5 million in accrued liabilities which represents our best estimate of the loss related to this matter. The actual amount of this loss will not be known until a final settlement, if any, is reached or the litigation is concluded. See Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for further discussion of this matter. |
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
For a detailed discussion of our critical accounting policies and estimates, please refer to our
2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
Please refer to Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for
recent accounting pronouncements.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
We have included below a discussion of our operating results and significant items which explain
the material changes in our operating results during the three and six months ended February 28,
2010, compared to the prior periods in fiscal year 2009. Our operations are generally subject to
seasonal trends. We experience, and expect to continue to experience, fluctuations in our results
of operations as a result of seasonal variations in the level of student enrollments and timing of
certification exams.
| University of Phoenix - University of Phoenix enrolls students throughout the year, with its net revenue generally lower in the second quarter (December through February) than the other quarters due to holiday breaks in December and January. | ||
| BPP BPP experiences significant seasonality associated with the timing of when its courses begin and exam dates, which generally results in considerably lower net revenue in the second and to an even greater degree in the fourth quarters as compared to the other quarters. In addition, as the cost structure of BPP is relatively fixed, BPPs profitability is substantially lower in the second and fourth quarters. | ||
| Other subsidiaries Many of our other subsidiaries experience significant seasonality, as they have limited enrollment during their respective summer breaks and winter holidays. |
We categorize our operating expenses as instructional costs and services, selling and promotional,
and general and administrative.
| Instructional costs and services consist primarily of costs related to the delivery and administration of our educational programs and include costs related to faculty and administrative compensation, classroom and faculty administration lease expenses and depreciation, bad debt expense, financial aid processing costs and other related costs. Tuition costs for all employees and their eligible family members are recorded as an expense within instructional costs and services. | ||
| Selling and promotional costs consist primarily of compensation for enrollment counselors, management and support staff and corporate marketing, advertising expenses, production of marketing materials, and other costs directly related to selling and promotional functions. Selling and promotional costs are expensed when incurred. | ||
| General and administrative costs consist primarily of corporate compensation, occupancy costs, depreciation and amortization of property and equipment, legal and professional fees, and other related costs. |
For the three months ended February 28, 2010 compared to the three months ended February 28, 2009
Analysis of Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income
The table below details our consolidated results of operations. For a more detailed discussion by
reportable segment, refer to our Analysis of Operating Results by Segment.
33
Table of Contents
Three Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||||||||||||||
% of Net Revenue | % | |||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | Change | |||||||||||||||
Net revenue |
$ | 1,070.3 | $ | 869.5 | 100.0 | % | 100.0 | % | 23.1 | % | ||||||||||
Costs and expenses: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Instructional costs and services |
517.3 | 364.4 | 48.3 | % | 41.9 | % | 42.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Selling and promotional |
263.5 | 224.6 | 24.6 | % | 25.8 | % | 17.3 | % | ||||||||||||
General and administrative |
72.0 | 69.4 | 6.7 | % | 8.0 | % | 3.7 | % | ||||||||||||
Estimated litigation loss |
44.5 | | 4.2 | % | 0.0 | % | 100.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Total costs and expenses |
897.3 | 658.4 | 83.8 | % | 75.7 | % | 36.3 | % | ||||||||||||
Operating income |
173.0 | 211.1 | 16.2 | % | 24.3 | % | (18.0 | %) | ||||||||||||
Interest income |
0.5 | 3.4 | 0.0 | % | 0.4 | % | (85.3 | %) | ||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(3.2 | ) | (0.6 | ) | (0.3 | %) | (0.1 | %) | (433.3 | %) | ||||||||||
Other, net |
(0.1 | ) | (0.2 | ) | 0.0 | % | 0.0 | % | 50.0 | % | ||||||||||
Income from continuing operations before income taxes |
170.2 | 213.7 | 15.9 | % | 24.6 | % | (20.4 | %) | ||||||||||||
Provision for income taxes |
(69.1 | ) | (85.2 | ) | (6.5 | %) | (9.8 | %) | 18.9 | % | ||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
101.1 | 128.5 | 9.4 | % | 14.8 | % | (21.3 | %) | ||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
(10.6 | ) | (3.5 | ) | (0.9 | %) | (0.4 | %) | * | |||||||||||
Net income |
90.5 | 125.0 | 8.5 | % | 14.4 | % | (27.6 | %) | ||||||||||||
Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests |
2.1 | 0.3 | 0.2 | % | 0.0 | % | * | |||||||||||||
Net income attributable to Apollo |
$ | 92.6 | $ | 125.3 | 8.7 | % | 14.4 | % | (26.1 | %) | ||||||||||
* | not meaningful |
Net Revenue
Our net revenue increased $200.8 million, or 23.1%, in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010
compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. University of Phoenixs 17.9% net revenue
growth was the primary contributor to the increase, mainly due to its growth in Degreed Enrollment
and selective tuition price increases. Apollo Globals acquisition of BPP also contributed $53.6
million, or 6.2 percentage points, of the overall increase in net revenue in the second quarter of
fiscal year 2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. For a more detailed
discussion, refer to our Analysis of Operating Results by Segment.
Instructional Costs and Services
Instructional costs and services increased $152.9 million, or 42.0%, in the second quarter of
fiscal year 2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009, which represents a 640 basis
point increase as a percentage of net revenue. The increase as a percentage of net revenue is
primarily due to BPPs cost structure, along with start-up, development and other infrastructure
and support costs incurred by Apollo Global, which have increased in scale with the acquisition of
BPP in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009. The increase is also due to an increase in bad debt
expense as a percentage of net revenue due to University of Phoenixs lower collection rates.
Collection rates have declined as a result of the economic downturn, the effects of certain
operational changes and increases in receivables from students enrolled in associates degree
programs. Students enrolled in associates degree programs generally persist at lower rates than
those in bachelors and graduate level programs, resulting in higher bad debts when these students
withdraw from the University of Phoenix. Our bad debt expense was 6.9% of net revenue in the second
quarter of fiscal year 2010 compared to 4.1% of net revenue in the second quarter of fiscal year
2009.
Selling and Promotional
Selling and promotional increased $38.9 million, or 17.3%, in the second quarter of fiscal year
2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009, but represents a 120 basis point decrease
as a percentage of net revenue. The increase in expense mainly resulted from University of
Phoenixs investments in non-internet long-term branding initiatives. However, the decrease as a
percentage of net revenue is primarily due to BPPs cost structure as BPP incurs lower selling and
promotional costs as a percentage of net revenue compared to our other businesses. Improved
enrollment counselor effectiveness at University of Phoenix also contributed to the decrease as a
percentage of net revenue.
General and Administrative
General and administrative increased $2.6 million, or 3.7%, in the second quarter of fiscal year
2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009, but represents a 130 basis point decrease
as a percentage of net revenue. The decrease as a percentage of net revenue is primarily due to
expense in the second quarter of fiscal year 2009 resulting from our internal review of certain
Satisfactory Academic Progress calculations. The decrease is also due to a reduction in share-based
compensation as a percentage of net revenue.
34
Table of Contents
Estimated Litigation Loss
In connection with the Securities Class Action matter, we recorded a charge of $44.5 million in the
second quarter of fiscal year 2010. See Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Item 1,
Financial Statements, for further discussion of this matter.
Interest Income
Interest income decreased $2.9 million in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 compared to the
second quarter of fiscal year 2009. The decrease is due to lower interest rate yields and a
decrease in average cash and cash equivalents balances (including restricted cash) during the
respective periods. When the Federal Reserve Bank lowers the Federal Funds Rate, it generally
results in a reduction in our interest rates. The reduction of the Federal Funds Rate in December
2008 to the range of 0.0% 0.25% lowered our average interest rate yield in the second quarters of
both fiscal years 2010 and 2009 below 1%.
Interest Expense
Interest expense increased $2.6 million in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 compared to the
second quarter of fiscal year 2009 due to an increase in average borrowings principally at
subsidiaries of Apollo Global, and borrowings on our syndicated $500 million credit agreement (the
Bank Facility) that were outstanding during the second quarter of fiscal year 2010.
Other, Net
Other, net in the second quarters of fiscal years 2010 and 2009 primarily consists of net foreign
currency losses related to our international operations.
Provision for Income Taxes
Our effective income tax rate for continuing operations for the second quarter of fiscal year 2010
was 40.6% compared to 39.9% for the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. The increase was primarily
attributable to an increase in our effective state income tax rate.
Recently, there have been a number of state law changes or interpretations that have resulted in a
larger portion of our income generated from online operations being subject to state income tax
and/or increases in the statutory rate at which certain states impose tax on our income. Given that
a large majority of the states currently face significant budget deficits, we anticipate that
additional states in which we are subject to income tax may enact similar tax law changes in the
relatively near future. We are currently pursuing state tax initiatives that, if successful, could
result in a future reduction in our state taxes.
Loss from Discontinued Operations, Net of Tax
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax, relates to our Insight Schools business, which we
classified as held for sale and as discontinued operations in the second quarter of fiscal year
2010. The increase in the loss from discontinued operations, net of tax, during the second quarter
of fiscal year 2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009 was primarily due to an
impairment of Insight Schools goodwill of $9.4 million recorded in the second quarter of fiscal
year 2010. This was partially offset by a decrease in operating losses mainly attributable to
growth in net revenue resulting from increased enrollment in the schools operated by Insight
Schools. Please refer to Note 3, Discontinued Operations, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for
further discussion.
Analysis of Operating Results by Segment
Three Months Ended February 28, | $ | % | ||||||||||||||
($ in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | Change | Change | ||||||||||||
Net revenue |
||||||||||||||||
University of Phoenix |
$ | 977.5 | $ | 829.3 | $ | 148.2 | 17.9 | % | ||||||||
Apollo Global: |
||||||||||||||||
BPP |
53.6 | | 53.6 | * | ||||||||||||
Other |
12.5 | 14.1 | (1.6 | ) | (11.3 | %) | ||||||||||
Total Apollo Global |
66.1 | 14.1 | 52.0 | * | ||||||||||||
Other Schools |
26.7 | 25.6 | 1.1 | 4.3 | % | |||||||||||
Corporate(1) |
| 0.5 | (0.5 | ) | * | |||||||||||
Total net revenue |
$ | 1,070.3 | $ | 869.5 | $ | 200.8 | 23.1 | % | ||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
||||||||||||||||
University of Phoenix |
$ | 246.4 | $ | 230.1 | $ | 16.3 | 7.1 | % | ||||||||
Apollo Global: |
||||||||||||||||
BPP |
(10.8 | ) | | (10.8 | ) | * | ||||||||||
Other |
(5.9 | ) | (2.0 | ) | (3.9 | ) | (195.0 | %) | ||||||||
Total Apollo Global |
(16.7 | ) | (2.0 | ) | (14.7 | ) | * | |||||||||
Other Schools |
(2.0 | ) | (1.3 | ) | (0.7 | ) | (53.8 | %) | ||||||||
Corporate(1) |
(54.7 | ) | (15.7 | ) | (39.0 | ) | * | |||||||||
Total operating income |
$ | 173.0 | $ | 211.1 | $ | (38.1 | ) | (18.0 | %) | |||||||
* | not meaningful |
35
Table of Contents
(1) | The Corporate caption in our segment reporting includes adjustments to reconcile segment results to consolidated results, which primarily consist of net revenue and corporate charges that are not allocated to our segments. The operating loss for Corporate in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 includes the $44.5 million charge associated with the Securities Class Action matter. See Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for further discussion of this matter. |
University of Phoenix
The $148.2 million, or 17.9%, increase in net revenue in our University of Phoenix segment was
primarily due to growth in its Degreed Enrollment as detailed below:
Degreed Enrollment(1) | New Degreed Enrollment(2) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter Ended February 28, | % | Quarter Ended February 28, | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(rounded to the nearest hundred) | 2010 | 2009 | Change | 2010 | 2009 | Change | |||||||||||||||||||
Associates |
201,300 | 170,500 | 18.1 | % | 43,100 | 41,700 | 3.4 | % | |||||||||||||||||
Bachelors |
178,000 | 150,200 | 18.5 | % | 31,300 | 25,100 | 24.7 | % | |||||||||||||||||
Masters |
71,800 | 70,500 | 1.8 | % | 12,200 | 12,500 | (2.4 | %) | |||||||||||||||||
Doctoral |
7,500 | 6,500 | 15.4 | % | 900 | 700 | 28.6 | % | |||||||||||||||||
Total |
458,600 | 397,700 | 15.3 | % | 87,500 | 80,000 | 9.4 | % |
(1) | Degreed Enrollment for a quarter represents individual students enrolled in a University of Phoenix degree program who attended a course during the quarter and did not graduate as of the end of the quarter. Degreed Enrollment for a quarter also includes any student who previously graduated from one degree program and started a new degree program in the quarter (for example, a graduate of the associates degree program returns for a bachelors degree or a bachelors degree graduate returns for a masters degree). In addition, Degreed Enrollment includes students participating in University of Phoenix certificate programs of at least 18 credit hours with some course applicability into a related degree program. | |
(2) | New Degreed Enrollment for a quarter represents any individual student enrolled in a University of Phoenix degree program who is a new student and started a course in the quarter, any individual student who previously graduated from one degree program and started a new degree program in the quarter (for example, a graduate of an associates degree program returns for a bachelors degree program, or a graduate of a bachelors degree program returns for a masters degree), as well as any individual student who started a degree program in the quarter and had been out of attendance for greater than 12 months. In addition, New Degreed Enrollment includes students who in the quarter started participating in University of Phoenix certificate programs of at least 18 credit hours in length with some course applicability into a related degree program. |
Enrollment growth is in part the result of investments in enhancing and expanding University of
Phoenix service offerings and academic quality. Enhancements in our marketing capabilities have
also contributed to the increases. A portion of the increase in Degreed Enrollment and New Degreed
Enrollment is due to the economic downturn, as working learners seek to advance their education to
improve their job security or reemployment prospects. Partially offsetting these increases was the
adverse impact of our University Orientation pilot program. In addition, the enrollment growth was
adversely impacted by the second quarter of fiscal year 2010 having one fewer associates course
start date as compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009.
36
Table of Contents
In addition to the growth in Degreed Enrollment, net revenue increased due to selective tuition
price and other fee changes implemented in July 2009, which varied by geographic area, program, and
degree level. In the aggregate, these selective price and other fee changes, including increases in
discounts for military and veteran students, averaged approximately 4%. The impact on future net
revenue and operating income will continue to be impacted by these price and other fee changes,
along with changes in enrollment, student mix within programs and degree levels, and discounts. The
increase in net revenue was partially offset by a continued shift in our student body mix to a
higher percentage of students enrolled in associates degree programs, which have tuition prices
generally lower than other degree programs. Associates Degreed Enrollment represented 43.9% of
Degreed Enrollment during the quarter ended February 28, 2010, compared to 42.9% during the quarter
ended February 28, 2009.
Operating income in our University of Phoenix segment increased $16.3 million, or 7.1%, during the
second quarter of fiscal year 2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. This
increase was primarily attributable to the following:
| The 17.9% increase in University of Phoenix net revenue; | ||
| Variable employee headcount has grown at a lower rate than the increase in net revenue; and | ||
| An increase in enrollment counselor effectiveness as a result of internal initiatives as well as an increase in the average tenure of enrollment counselors. |
The increase was partially offset by increased bad debt expense as a percentage of net revenue due
to University of Phoenixs lower collection rates. Collection rates have declined as a result of
the economic downturn, the effects of certain operational changes and increases in receivables from
students enrolled in associates degree programs. Students enrolled in associates degree programs
generally persist at lower rates than those in bachelors and graduate level programs, resulting in
higher bad debts when these students withdraw from the University of Phoenix.
Apollo Global
Net revenue in our Apollo Global segment increased $52.0 million during the second quarter of
fiscal year 2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. The increase was due to Apollo
Globals acquisition of BPP during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009, which contributed $53.6
million in net revenue in the second quarter of fiscal year 2010.
Operating loss in our Apollo Global segment increased $14.7 million during the second quarter of
fiscal year 2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009 primarily due to the following:
| The $10.8 million operating loss generated by BPP, which is primarily the result of BPPs highly seasonal business, certain investments in BPP associated with the integration process and an adverse impact from the global economic downturn. BPP experiences significant seasonality associated with the timing of when its courses begin and exam dates, which generally results in considerably lower net revenue in the second and to an even greater degree in the fourth quarters as compared to the other quarters. In addition, as the cost structure of BPP, including amortization of intangibles, is relatively fixed, BPPs profitability is substantially lower in the second and fourth quarters. | ||
| General and administrative expenses associated with the pursuit of opportunities to partner with and/or acquire existing institutions of higher learning. | ||
| Investment in UNIACC and ULA including, but not limited to, initiatives to enhance academic quality and marketing. |
Other Schools
Net revenue and operating income in our Other Schools segment was essentially flat during the
second quarter of fiscal year 2010 compared to the second quarter of fiscal year 2009.
For the six months ended February 28, 2010 compared to the six months ended February 28, 2009
Analysis of Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
The table below details our consolidated results of operations. For a more detailed discussion by
reportable segment, refer to our Analysis of Operating Results by Segment.
Six Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||||||||||||||
% of Net Revenue | % | |||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | Change | |||||||||||||||
Net revenue |
$ | 2,329.0 | $ | 1,832.8 | 100.0 | % | 100.0 | % | 27.1 | % | ||||||||||
Costs and expenses: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Instructional costs and services |
1,036.8 | 733.4 | 44.5 | % | 40.0 | % | 41.4 | % | ||||||||||||
Selling and promotional |
537.6 | 450.9 | 23.1 | % | 24.6 | % | 19.2 | % | ||||||||||||
General and administrative |
144.1 | 127.3 | 6.2 | % | 7.0 | % | 13.2 | % | ||||||||||||
Estimated litigation loss |
44.5 | | 1.9 | % | 0.0 | % | 100.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Total costs and expenses |
1,763.0 | 1,311.6 | 75.7 | % | 71.6 | % | 34.4 | % | ||||||||||||
Operating income |
566.0 | 521.2 | 24.3 | % | 28.4 | % | 8.6 | % | ||||||||||||
Interest income |
1.5 | 8.8 | 0.1 | % | 0.5 | % | (83.0 | %) | ||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(6.1 | ) | (2.1 | ) | (0.3 | %) | (0.1 | %) | (190.5 | %) | ||||||||||
Other, net |
(0.8 | ) | (2.6 | ) | 0.0 | % | (0.1 | %) | 69.2 | % | ||||||||||
Income from continuing operations before income taxes |
560.6 | 525.3 | 24.1 | % | 28.7 | % | 6.7 | % | ||||||||||||
Provision for income taxes |
(219.0 | ) | (214.5 | ) | (9.4 | %) | (11.7 | %) | (2.1 | %) | ||||||||||
Income from continuing operations |
341.6 | 310.8 | 14.7 | % | 17.0 | % | 9.9 | % | ||||||||||||
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
(11.0 | ) | (5.4 | ) | (0.5 | %) | (0.3 | %) | * | |||||||||||
Net income |
330.6 | 305.4 | 14.2 | % | 16.7 | % | 8.3 | % | ||||||||||||
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
2.1 | 0.3 | 0.1 | % | 0.0 | % | * | |||||||||||||
Net income attributable to Apollo |
$ | 332.7 | $ | 305.7 | 14.3 | % | 16.7 | % | 8.8 | % | ||||||||||
* | not meaningful |
37
Table of Contents
Net Revenue
Our net revenue increased $496.2 million, or 27.1% in the first six months of fiscal year 2010
compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009. University of Phoenixs 20.5% net revenue
growth was the primary contributor to the increase, mainly due to its growth in Degreed Enrollment
and selective tuition price increases. Apollo Globals acquisition of BPP also contributed $142.3
million, or 7.8 percentage points, of the overall increase in net revenue in the first six months
of fiscal year 2010. For a more detailed discussion, refer to our Analysis of Operating Results by
Segment.
Instructional Costs and Services
Instructional costs and services increased $303.4 million, or 41.4%, in the first six months of
fiscal year 2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009, which represents a 450 basis
point increase as a percentage of net revenue. The increase as a percentage of net revenue is
primarily due to BPPs cost structure, along with start-up, development and other infrastructure
and support costs incurred by Apollo Global, which have increased in scale with the acquisition of
BPP in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009. The increase is also due to an increase in bad debt
expense as a percentage of net revenue due to University of Phoenixs lower collection rates.
Collection rates have declined as a result of the economic downturn, the effects of certain
operational changes and increases in receivables from students enrolled in associates degree
programs. Students enrolled in associates degree programs generally persist at lower rates than
those in bachelors and graduate level programs, resulting in higher bad debts when these students
withdraw from the University of Phoenix. Our bad debt expense was 5.9% of net revenue in the first
six months of fiscal year 2010 compared to 3.8% of net revenue in the first six months of fiscal
year 2009.
Selling and Promotional
Selling and promotional increased $86.7 million, or 19.2%, in the first six months of fiscal year
2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009, but represents a 150 basis point
decrease as a percentage of net revenue. The increase in expense mainly resulted from University of
Phoenixs investments in non-internet long-term branding initiatives. However, the decrease as a
percentage of net revenue is primarily due to BPPs cost structure as BPP incurs lower selling and
promotional costs as a percentage of net revenue compared to our other businesses. Improved
enrollment counselor effectiveness at University of Phoenix also contributed to the decrease as a
percentage of net revenue.
General and Administrative
General and administrative increased $16.8 million, or 13.2%, in the first six months of fiscal
year 2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009, but represents an 80 basis point
decrease as a percentage of net revenue. The decrease as a percentage of net revenue is primarily
due to expense in the first six months of fiscal year 2009 resulting from our internal review of
certain
Satisfactory Academic Progress calculations. The decrease is also due to a reduction in share-based
compensation as a percentage of net revenue.
38
Table of Contents
Estimated Litigation Loss
In connection with the Securities Class Action matter, we recorded a charge of $44.5 million in the
second quarter of fiscal year 2010. See Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Item 1,
Financial Statements, for further discussion of this matter.
Interest Income
Interest income decreased $7.3 million in the first six months of fiscal year 2010 compared to the
first six months of fiscal year 2009. The decrease is primarily due to lower interest rate yields
during the respective periods. When the Federal Reserve Bank lowers the Federal Funds Rate, it
generally results in a reduction in our interest rates. The reduction of the Federal Funds Rate in
December 2008 to the range of 0.0% 0.25% has lowered our average interest rate yield in the first
six months of fiscal year 2010 below 1%.
Interest Expense
Interest expense increased $4.0 million in the first six months of fiscal year 2010 compared to the
first six months of fiscal year 2009 due to an increase in average borrowings principally at
subsidiaries of Apollo Global, and borrowings on our syndicated $500 million credit agreement (the
Bank Facility) that were outstanding during the first six months of fiscal year 2010.
Other, Net
Other, net in the first six months of fiscal years 2010 and 2009 primarily consists of net foreign
currency losses related to our international operations.
Provision for Income Taxes
Our effective income tax rate for continuing operations for the first six months of fiscal year
2010 was 39.1% compared to 40.8% for the first six months of fiscal year 2009. The decrease was
primarily attributable to the tax benefit of $11.4 million recorded in the first quarter of fiscal
year 2010 associated with our settlement of a dispute with the Internal Revenue Service relating to
the deduction of certain stock option compensation on our U.S. federal income tax returns beginning
in fiscal year 2003. Refer to Note 11, Income Taxes, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for
additional information. This was partially offset by an increase in state taxes.
Recently, there have been a number of state law changes or interpretations that have resulted in a
larger portion of our income generated from online operations being subject to state income tax
and/or increases in the statutory rate at which certain states impose tax on our income. Given that
a large majority of the states currently face significant budget deficits, we anticipate that
additional states in which we are subject to income tax may enact similar tax law changes in the
relatively near future. We are currently pursuing state tax initiatives that, if successful, could
result in a future reduction in our state taxes.
Loss from Discontinued Operations, Net of Tax
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax, relates to our Insight Schools business, which we
classified as held for sale and as discontinued operations in the second quarter of fiscal year
2010. The increase in the loss from discontinued operations, net of tax, during the first six
months of fiscal year 2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009 was primarily due
to impairment of Insight Schools goodwill of $9.4 million recorded in the second quarter of fiscal
year 2010. This was partially offset by a decrease in operating losses mainly attributable to
growth in net revenue resulting from increased enrollment in the schools operated by Insight
Schools. Please refer to Note 3, Discontinued Operations, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for
further discussion.
Analysis of Operating Results by Segment
The table below details our operating results by segment for the periods indicated:
Six Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||||||||||
$ | % | |||||||||||||||
($ in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | Change | Change | ||||||||||||
Net revenue |
||||||||||||||||
University of Phoenix |
$ | 2,099.8 | $ | 1,742.5 | $ | 357.3 | 20.5 | % | ||||||||
Apollo Global: |
||||||||||||||||
BPP |
142.3 | | 142.3 | * | ||||||||||||
Other |
28.9 | 31.1 | (2.2 | ) | (7.1 | %) | ||||||||||
Total Apollo Global |
171.2 | 31.1 | 140.1 | * | ||||||||||||
Other Schools |
58.0 | 57.6 | 0.4 | 0.7 | % | |||||||||||
Corporate(1) |
| 1.6 | (1.6 | ) | * | |||||||||||
Total net revenue |
$ | 2,329.0 | $ | 1,832.8 | $ | 496.2 | 27.1 | % | ||||||||
Operating income (loss) |
||||||||||||||||
University of Phoenix |
$ | 637.4 | $ | 540.3 | $ | 97.1 | 18.0 | % | ||||||||
Apollo Global: |
||||||||||||||||
BPP |
4.8 | | 4.8 | * | ||||||||||||
Other |
(7.8 | ) | (1.3 | ) | (6.5 | ) | * | |||||||||
Total Apollo Global |
(3.0 | ) | (1.3 | ) | (1.7 | ) | * | |||||||||
Other Schools |
0.7 | 3.2 | (2.5 | ) | (78.1 | %) | ||||||||||
Corporate(1) |
(69.1 | ) | (21.0 | ) | (48.1 | ) | * | |||||||||
Total operating income |
$ | 566.0 | $ | 521.2 | $ | 44.8 | 8.6 | % | ||||||||
* | not meaningful |
39
Table of Contents
(1) | The Corporate caption in our segment reporting includes adjustments to reconcile segment results to consolidated results, which primarily consist of net revenue and corporate charges that are not allocated to our segments. The operating loss for Corporate in the first six months of fiscal year 2010 includes the $44.5 million charge associated with the Securities Class Action matter. See Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for further discussion of this matter. |
University of Phoenix
The $357.3 million, or 20.5%, increase in net revenue in our University of Phoenix segment was
primarily due to growth in Degreed Enrollment and selective tuition price increases implemented in
July 2009, which varied by geographic area, program, and degree level. In the aggregate, these
selective price and other fee changes, including increases in discounts for military and veteran
students, averaged approximately 4%. The impact on future net revenue and operating income will
continue to be impacted by these price and other fee changes, along with changes in enrollment,
student mix within programs and degree levels, and discounts. The increase in net revenue was
partially offset by a continued shift in student body mix to a higher percentage of students
enrolled in associates degree programs, which have tuition prices generally lower than other
degree programs. Average associates Degreed Enrollment represented 44.5% of average Degreed
Enrollment during the first six months of fiscal year 2010, compared to 42.5% for the first six
months of fiscal year 2009. In addition, average associates Degreed Enrollment increased 22.4% in
the first six months of fiscal year 2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009.
Operating income in our University of Phoenix segment increased $97.1 million, or 18.0%, during the
first six months of fiscal year 2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009. This
increase was primarily attributable to the following:
| The 20.5% increase in University of Phoenix net revenue; | ||
| Variable employee headcount has grown at a lower rate than the increase in net revenue; and | ||
| An increase in enrollment counselor effectiveness as a result of internal initiatives as well as an increase in the average tenure of enrollment counselors. |
The increase was partially offset by increased bad debt expense as a percentage of net revenue due
to University of Phoenixs lower collection rates. Collection rates have declined as a result of
the economic downturn, the effects of certain operational changes and increases in receivables from
students enrolled in associates degree programs. Students enrolled in associates degree programs
generally persist at lower rates than those in bachelors and graduate level programs, resulting in
higher bad debts when these students withdraw from the University of Phoenix.
Apollo Global
Net revenue in our Apollo Global segment increased $140.1 million during the first six months of
fiscal year 2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009. The increase was due to
Apollo Globals acquisition of BPP during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009, which contributed
$142.3 million in net revenue in the first six months of fiscal year 2010.
40
Table of Contents
Operating loss in our Apollo Global segment increased $1.7 million during the first six months of
fiscal year 2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009 primarily due to the
following:
| General and administrative expenses associated with the pursuit of opportunities to partner with and/or acquire existing institutions of higher learning; and | ||
| Investment in UNIACC, ULA, and BPP including, but not limited to, initiatives to enhance academic quality and marketing. |
The increase in the operating loss driven by the two factors above was partially offset by $4.8
million in operating income generated by BPP during the first six months of fiscal year 2010. BPP
experiences significant seasonality associated with the timing of when its courses begin and exam
dates, which generally results in considerably lower net revenue in the second and to an even
greater degree in the fourth quarters as compared to the other quarters. In addition, as the cost
structure of BPP, including amortization of intangibles, is relatively fixed, BPPs profitability
is substantially lower in the second and fourth quarters.
Other Schools
Net revenue and operating income in our Other Schools segment was essentially flat during the first
six months of fiscal year 2010 compared to the first six months of fiscal year 2009.
LIQUIDITY, CAPITAL RESOURCES, AND FINANCIAL POSITION
We believe that our cash and cash equivalents and available liquidity will be adequate to satisfy
our working capital and other liquidity requirements associated with our existing operations
through at least the next 12 months. We believe that the most strategic uses of our cash resources
include investments in the continued enhancement and expansion of our student offerings, share
repurchases, acquisition opportunities including our commitment to Apollo Global, and investments
in marketing and information technology initiatives.
Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash and Cash Equivalents
The following table provides a summary of our cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash and
cash equivalents at February 28, 2010 and August 31, 2009:
% of Total Assets | ||||||||||||||||||||
February 28, | August 31, | February 28, | August 31, | % | ||||||||||||||||
($ in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | Change | |||||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 660.8 | $ | 968.2 | 22.0 | % | 29.7 | % | (31.7 | %) | ||||||||||
Restricted cash and cash equivalents |
507.2 | 432.3 | 16.9 | % | 13.2 | % | 17.3 | % | ||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 1,168.0 | $ | 1,400.5 | 38.9 | % | 42.9 | % | (16.6 | %) | ||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents (excluding restricted cash) decreased $307.4 million primarily due to
$406.0 million used for net payments on borrowings, $201.1 million used for the repurchase of
shares of our Class A common stock, a $74.8 million increase in restricted cash, and $68.1 million
used for capital expenditures, which was partially offset by $434.9 million of cash generated from
operations. Cash generated from operations was negatively impacted by our $80.5 million settlement
payment, including legal fees, for the Incentive Compensation False Claims Act Lawsuit.
We measure our money market funds included in cash and restricted cash equivalents at fair value.
Our money market funds totaling $1,162.0 million were valued primarily using real-time quotes for
transactions in active exchange markets involving identical assets. As of February 28, 2010, we did
not record any material adjustments to reflect these instruments at fair value.
For further discussion of our fair value measurements recorded at fair value on a recurring and
non-recurring basis, Refer to Note 7, Fair Value Measurements, in Item 1, Financial Statements.
Debt
On January 4, 2008, we entered into a syndicated $500 million credit agreement (the Bank
Facility). The Bank Facility is an unsecured revolving credit facility available for general
corporate purposes including acquisitions and stock buybacks. The Bank Facility has an expansion
feature for an aggregate principal amount of up to $250 million. The term is five years, expiring
on
41
Table of Contents
January 4, 2013. The Bank Facility provides a multi-currency sub-limit facility for borrowings
in certain specified foreign currencies up to $300 million.
As of August 31, 2009, we borrowed our entire credit line under the Bank Facility, which included
£63.0 million denominated in British Pounds (equivalent to $102.6 million and $97.2 million U.S.
dollars as of August 31, 2009 and February 28, 2010, respectively) related to the BPP acquisition.
We repaid the U.S. dollar denominated debt on our Bank Facility of $393 million during the first
quarter of fiscal year 2010.
The Bank Facility fees are determined based on a pricing grid that varies according to our leverage
ratio. The Bank Facility fee ranges from 12.5 to 17.5 basis points and the incremental fees for
borrowings under the facility range from LIBOR + 50.0 to 82.5 basis points. The weighted average
interest rate on outstanding borrowings under the Bank Facility at February 28, 2010 was 1.0%.
The Bank Facility contains affirmative and negative covenants, including the following financial
covenants: maximum leverage ratio, minimum coverage interest and rent expense ratio, and a U.S.
Department of Education financial responsibility composite score. In addition, there are covenants
restricting indebtedness, liens, investments, asset transfers and distributions. We were in
compliance with all covenants related to the Bank Facility at February 28, 2010.
Other debt includes $59.7 million of variable rate debt and $12.8 million of fixed rate debt at the
subsidiaries of Apollo Global. The weighted average interest rate of these debt instruments at
February 28, 2010 was 2.9%.
U.S. Department of Education Program Review Report
On December 31, 2009, University of Phoenix received the U.S. Department of Educations Program
Review Report associated with a program review conducted in February 2009, which is a preliminary report of the U.S. Department of Educations findings. We are in the process of
finalizing our response to these findings and plan to submit them shortly. The
U.S. Department of Education will review our response and will issue a Final Program Review
Determination letter that will confirm any required corrective action or amounts owed to the U.S.
Department of Education. We believe that our liability resulting from the findings will be
approximately $1.5 million, which has been accrued in our February 28, 2010 financial statements.
In addition, we may be required to post a letter of credit of approximately $125 million within 30
days of the issuance of the Final Program Review Determination letter to be maintained until at
least September 30, 2011. Refer to Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Item 1, Financial
Statements, for additional information.
Cash Flows
Operating Activities
The following table provides a summary of our operating cash flows during the respective periods:
Six Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||
($ in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Net income |
$ | 330.6 | $ | 305.4 | ||||
Non-cash items |
264.0 | 126.6 | ||||||
Changes in certain operating assets and liabilities |
(159.7 | ) | 43.6 | |||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
$ | 434.9 | $ | 475.6 | ||||
Six Months Ended February 28, 2010 Our non-cash items primarily consisted of a $136.6 million
provision for uncollectible accounts receivable, $64.7 million of depreciation and amortization, a
$44.5 million charge associated with the Securities Class Action matter and $29.1 million of
share-based compensation. These items were partially offset by $19.7 million of deferred taxes. The
changes in certain operating assets and liabilities primarily consisted of a $116.9 million
increase in gross accounts receivable primarily due to increased enrollment and lower collection
rates on aged receivables, and a $89.7 million decrease in accounts payable and accrued liabilities
due to our $80.5 million settlement payment, including legal fees, for the Incentive Compensation
False Claims Act Lawsuit. These items were partially offset by increases in student deposits and
deferred revenue of $31.4 million and $18.4 million, respectively, primarily due to increased
enrollment.
Six Months Ended February 28, 2009 Our non-cash items primarily consisted of a $70.9 million
provision for uncollectible accounts receivable, $46.3 million for depreciation and amortization,
and $31.4 million for share-based compensation, which was partially offset by $12.6 million of
deferred income taxes and $11.2 million of excess tax benefits from share-based compensation. The
changes in certain operating assets and liabilities primarily consisted of increases in student
deposits and deferred revenue of $108.2 million
42
Table of Contents
and $20.9 million, respectively, primarily due to
increased enrollment, and an $18.1 million increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities.
This was partially offset by a $52.0 million decrease in income taxes payable due to the timing of
our quarterly income tax payments, and a $48.3 million increase in accounts receivable.
We monitor our accounts receivable through a variety of metrics, including days sales outstanding.
We calculate our days sales outstanding by determining average daily student revenue based on a
rolling 12 month analysis and divide it into the gross student accounts receivable balance as of
the end of the period.
As of February 28, 2010, excluding accounts receivable and the related net revenue for Apollo
Global, our days sales outstanding was 30 days, as compared to 32 days as of August 31, 2009, and
25 days as of February 28, 2009. The increase in days sales outstanding as compared to February 28,
2009 is primarily due to increases in gross accounts receivable due to University of Phoenixs
lower collection rates. Collection rates have declined as a result of the economic downturn, the
effects of certain operational changes and increases in receivables from students enrolled in
associates degree programs.
Investing Activities
The following table provides a summary of our investing cash flows during the respective periods:
Three Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||
($ in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents |
$ | (74.8 | ) | $ | (114.2 | ) | ||
Capital expenditures |
(68.1 | ) | (64.0 | ) | ||||
Other |
| 1.6 | ||||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
$ | (142.9 | ) | $ | (176.6 | ) | ||
Six Months Ended February 28, 2010 Cash used for investing activities primarily consisted of a
$74.8 million increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents principally due to increased student
deposits associated with students receiving financial aid, and $68.1 million used for capital
expenditures that primarily relates to investments in our computer equipment and software.
Six Months Ended February 28, 2009 Cash used for investing activities primarily consisted of a
$114.2 million increase in restricted cash and cash equivalents as a result of increased student
deposits and $64.0 million for capital expenditures that primarily relate to investments in our
computer equipment and software.
Financing Activities
The following table provides a summary of our financing cash flows during the respective periods:
Three Months Ended February 28, | ||||||||
($ in millions) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Payments on borrowings, net |
$ | (406.0 | ) | $ | (1.9 | ) | ||
Apollo Class A common stock purchased for treasury |
(201.1 | ) | (2.5 | ) | ||||
Issuance of Apollo Class A common stock |
8.6 | 96.5 | ||||||
Other |
0.3 | 11.2 | ||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
$ | (598.2 | ) | $ | 103.3 | |||
Six Months Ended February 28, 2010 Cash used in financing activities primarily consisted of
$406.0 million used for net payments on borrowings and $201.1 million used for the repurchase of
our Class A common stock, which was partially offset by $8.6 million provided by stock option
exercises and shares issued under our employee stock purchase plan.
Six Months Ended February 28, 2009 Cash provided by financing activities primarily consisted of
$96.5 million provided by stock option exercises and shares issued under our employee stock
purchase plan.
43
Table of Contents
Contractual Obligations and Other Commercial Commitments
During the first six months of fiscal year 2010, we had the following material changes in our
contractual obligations and other commercial commitments:
| We repaid the U.S. dollar denominated debt on our Bank Facility of $393 million; and | ||
| Our total liability for uncertain tax benefits, including interest and penalties, decreased $34.0 million primarily due to our settlement of an Internal Revenue Service audit. Refer to Note 11, Income Taxes, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for additional information. |
There have been no other material changes in our contractual obligations and other commercial
commitments other than in the ordinary course of business since the end of fiscal year 2009 through
February 28, 2010. Information regarding our contractual obligations and commercial commitments is
provided in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
44
Table of Contents
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Impact of Inflation
Inflation has not had a significant impact on our historical operations.
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk
We use the U.S. dollar as our reporting currency. The functional currencies of our foreign
subsidiaries are generally the local currencies. Accordingly, our foreign currency exchange risk is
related to the following exposure areas:
| Adjustments resulting from the translation of assets and liabilities of the foreign subsidiaries into U.S. dollars using exchange rates in effect at the balance sheet dates. These translation adjustments are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss); | ||
| Earnings volatility from the translation of income and expense items of the foreign subsidiaries using an average monthly exchange rate for the respective periods; and | ||
| Gains and losses resulting from foreign currency exchange rate changes related to intercompany receivables and payables that are not of a long-term investment nature, as well as gains and losses from foreign currency transactions. These items are recorded in Other, net in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income. |
During the first six months of fiscal year 2010, we recorded $19.0 million in net foreign currency
translation losses, net of tax, that are included in other comprehensive income. These losses are
primarily the result of the strengthening of the U.S. dollar relative to the British Pound during
the first six months of fiscal year 2010.
As we expand our international operations, we will conduct more transactions in currencies other
than the U.S. Dollar. Additionally, we expect the volume of transactions in the various foreign
currencies will continue to increase, thus increasing our exposure to foreign currency exchange
rate fluctuations.
Interest Rate Risk
Interest Income
As of February 28, 2010, we held $1,187.6 million in cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and
cash equivalents, and marketable securities. During the six months ended February 28, 2010, we
earned interest income of $1.5 million. When the Federal Reserve Bank lowers the Federal Funds
Rate, it generally results in a reduction in our interest rates. The reduction of the Federal Funds
Rate in December 2008 to the range of 0.0% 0.25% has lowered our interest rate yield during the
first six months of fiscal year 2010 below 1%. Based on the current Federal Funds Rate, we do not
believe any further reduction would have a material impact on us.
Interest Expense
We have exposure to changing interest rates primarily associated with our variable rate debt. At
February 28, 2010, we had a total outstanding debt balance of $176.1 million, which consisted of
$156.9 million of variable rate debt and $19.2 million of fixed rate debt including capital lease
obligations.
We have not historically entered into financial arrangements to hedge our interest rate exposure.
However, in connection with the BPP acquisition, we acquired an interest rate swap with a notional
amount of £30.0 million ($46.3 million) used to minimize the interest rate exposure on a portion of
BPPs variable rate debt. The interest rate swap is used to fix the variable interest rate on the
associated debt. As of February 28, 2010, the fair value of the swap is a liability of $3.9 million
and is included in other current liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
For the purpose of sensitivity, based on our outstanding variable rate debt exposed to changes in
interest rates as of February 28, 2010, an increase of 100 basis points in our weighted average
interest rate would increase interest expense by approximately $1.1 million on an annual basis.
Auction-Rate Securities Risk
At February 28, 2010, our auction-rate securities totaled $19.6 million. Our auction-rate
securities are insignificant to our total assets that require fair value measurements and thus, the
use and possible changes in the use of unobservable inputs used to determine the fair value of our
auction-rate securities would not have a material impact on our liquidity and capital resources.
45
Table of Contents
We will continue to monitor our investment portfolio. We will also continue to evaluate any changes
in the market value of the failed auction-rate securities that have not been liquidated and
depending upon existing market conditions, we may be required to record other-than-temporary
impairment charges in the future.
For all of our financial instruments recorded at fair value, please refer to Note 7, Fair Value
Measurements, in Item 1, Financial Statements, for additional information about our valuation
methods.
46
Table of Contents
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We intend to maintain disclosure controls and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance
that information required to be disclosed in reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the specified time periods
and accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Co-Chief Executive Officers
(Principal Executive Officers) and our Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer), as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure. We have established a Disclosure Committee, consisting of certain members of
management, to assist in this evaluation. Our Disclosure Committee meets on a quarterly basis and
more often if necessary.
Our management, under the supervision and with the participation of our Principal Executive
Officers and Principal Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e) promulgated under the Securities
Exchange Act), as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation,
management concluded that, as of that date, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective
at the reasonable assurance level.
Attached as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q are certifications of our Principal
Executive Officers and Principal Financial Officer, which are required in accordance with Rule
13a-14 of the Securities Exchange Act. This Disclosure Controls and Procedures section includes
information concerning managements evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures referred to in
those certifications and, as such, should be read in conjunction with the certifications of our
Principal Executive Officers and Principal Financial Officer.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
We acquired BPP Holdings plc (BPP) in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009. We are not yet
required to evaluate, and have not fully evaluated BPPs internal control over financial reporting
and, therefore, any material changes in internal control over financial reporting that may result
from this acquisition were not disclosed in our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K, or this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q. We intend to disclose all material changes in internal control over financial
reporting resulting from this acquisition prior to or in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ending August 31, 2010, in which report we will be required for the first time to
include BPP in our annual assessment of internal control over financial reporting.
Subject to BPPs internal control over financial reporting as discussed above, there have not been
any changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended February 28,
2010, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting.
47
Table of Contents
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Please refer to Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in Part I, Item 1, Financial Statements,
for legal proceedings, which is incorporated into Item 1 of Part II by this reference.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
In addition to the updated risk factors set forth below, please see the risk factors included in
our 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Accreditation Requirements
If we fail to maintain our institutional accreditation or if our institutional accrediting body
loses recognition by the U.S. Department of Education, we could lose our ability to participate in
Title IV programs, which would materially and adversely affect our business.
University of Phoenix and Western International University are institutionally accredited by
The Higher Learning Commission (HLC), one of the six regional accrediting agencies recognized by
the U.S. Department of Education. Accreditation by an accrediting agency recognized by the U.S.
Department of Education is required in order for an institution to become and remain eligible to
participate in Title IV programs.
If the U.S. Department of Education ceased to recognize HLC for any reason, University of
Phoenix and Western International University would not be eligible to participate in Title IV
programs beginning 18 months after the date such recognition ceased unless HLC was again recognized
or our institutions were accredited by another accrediting body recognized by the U.S. Department
of Education. In December 2009, the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Education
(OIG) requested that the U.S. Department of Education review the appropriateness of the U.S.
Department of Educations recognition of HLC as an accrediting body, following the OIGs
unfavorable review of HLCs initial accreditation of a non-traditional, for-profit postsecondary
educational institution. We cannot predict the outcome of the U.S. Department of Educations review
of HLCs recognition. HLC accredits over 1,000 colleges and universities, including some of the
most highly regarded universities in the U.S.
Regardless of the outcome of the U.S. Department of Educations review of HLC, the focus by
the OIG and the U.S. Department of Education on the process pursuant to which HLC accredited a
non-traditional, for-profit postsecondary educational institution may make the accreditation review
process more challenging for University of Phoenix and Western International University when they
undergo their normal HLC accreditation review process in the future. In addition, programmatic or
location expansion by University of Phoenix and/or Western International University may result in
increased scrutiny or additional requirements. If this occurred, we may have to incur additional
costs and/or curtail or modify certain program offerings or new locations at which we offer our
programs in order to maintain our accreditation, which could increase our costs, reduce our
enrollment and materially and adversely affect our business.
The loss of accreditation for any reason would, among other things, render our schools and
programs ineligible to participate in Title IV programs, affect our authorization to operate and to
grant degrees in certain states and decrease student demand. If University of Phoenix became
ineligible to participate in Title IV programs, we could not conduct our business as it is
currently conducted and it would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Regulatory
Pending rulemaking by the U.S. Department of Education could result in regulatory changes that
materially and adversely affect our business.
In November 2009, the U.S. Department of Education convened two new negotiated rulemaking
teams related to Title IV program integrity issues and foreign school issues. The team addressing
program integrity issues, which included representatives of the various higher education
constituencies, was unable to reach consensus on the form of all of the rules addressed by that
team. Accordingly, under the negotiated rulemaking protocol, the U.S. Department of Education is
free to propose rules without regard to the tentative agreement reached regarding certain of the
rules. The U.S. Department of Education is expected to issue its proposed regulations for public
comment sometime this spring or summer and final regulations prior to November 1, 2010, to be
effective July 1, 2011.
48
Table of Contents
The proposed program integrity rulemaking addresses numerous topics. The most significant
proposals for our business are the following:
| Modification of the standards relating to the payment of incentive compensation to employees involved in student recruitment and enrollment; and | ||
| Adoption of a definition of gainful employment for purposes of the requirement for Title IV student financial aid that a program of study prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation. |
Incentive Compensation
A school participating in Title IV programs may not pay any commission, bonus or other
incentive payments to any person involved in student recruitment or admissions or awarding of
Title IV program funds, if such payments are based directly or indirectly on success in enrolling
students or obtaining student financial aid. The law and regulations governing this requirement do
not establish clear criteria for compliance in all circumstances, but there currently are twelve
safe harbors that define specific types of compensation that are deemed not to constitute
impermissible incentive compensation. Currently, we rely on several of these safe harbors to ensure
that our compensation and recruitment practices comply with the applicable requirements.
The U.S. Department of Education has proposed to eliminate these twelve safe harbors and, in
lieu of the safe harbors, to define some of the relevant concepts relating to the incentive
compensation limitations. As presented by the U.S. Department of Education in the negotiated
rulemaking process, these changes would increase the uncertainty about what constitutes incentive
compensation and which employees are covered by the regulation. If the final regulations increase
this uncertainty or substantively modify the applicable standards, we may have to change some of
our compensation practices for enrollment counselors and others. This could adversely affect our
ability to compensate our enrollment counselors and other employees in a manner that appropriately
reflects their relative merit, which in turn could reduce their effectiveness and make it more
difficult to attract and retain staff with the desired talent and motivation to succeed at Apollo.
In addition, a lack of certainty could increase the risk of future Federal False Claims Act qui tam
lawsuits in which private plaintiffs assert that our compensation practices violate the incentive
compensation rules and, therefore, that our receipt of Title IV funds constitutes a false claim. We
recently settled, without admitting any violation or misconduct, such a qui tam lawsuit relating to
our enrollment counselor compensation practices. See the discussion of this lawsuit under
Incentive Compensation False Claims Act Lawsuit in Note 15, Commitments and Contingencies, in
Part 1, Item 1, Financial Statements.
The elimination of the existing twelve safe harbors also could affect the manner in which we
conduct our business in the following additional ways:
| Our IPD business currently utilizes a revenue sharing model with its client institutions, which is expressly permitted under one of the twelve incentive compensation safe harbors. If this type of revenue sharing becomes impermissible, we would need to modify IPDs business model so as to comply with the new requirements, which could materially and adversely affect this business. | ||
| We pay various third parties for Internet-based services related to lead generation and marketing. As proposed, payments to a third party for providing student contact information for prospective students would still be permissible, provided that such payments are not based on the number of students who apply or enroll. If this regulation is adopted in the form presented by the U.S. Department of Education in the negotiated rulemaking, it could reduce our ability to manage the quality of our leads and decrease our marketing efficiency, which could materially increase our marketing costs and adversely affect our business. |
Gainful Employment
Under the Higher Education Act of 1965, proprietary schools are eligible to participate in
Title IV programs in respect of educational programs that lead to gainful employment in a
recognized occupation. Historically, this concept has not been defined in detail. The U.S.
Department of Education has proposed adopting a definition of gainful employment that is based on a
ratio of student debt to income. Specifically, in the negotiated rulemaking process, the U.S.
Department of Education proposed rules pursuant to which a particular educational program would be
eligible for Title IV funding only if student loan debt service for graduates of such a program
does not exceed 8% of their annual income. As proposed, the student loan debt service would be
calculated on the basis of the median level of debt for students who complete the particular course
of study, assuming a ten-year amortization and the current unsubsidized Stafford loan program
interest rate, and annual income for program graduates would be calculated on the basis of the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics data, at the 25th percentile, for persons employed in the relevant
federal Standard Occupational Classification(s) for the specific program.
49
Table of Contents
As initially proposed by the U.S. Department of Education, educational programs that do not
meet the debt-to-income test would still be eligible if the student loan repayment rate among
program graduates is at least 90%, measured over a three year period.
If this regulation is adopted in a form similar to the U.S. Department of Educations proposal
in the negotiated rulemaking process, it could render many of our programs, and many programs
offered by other proprietary educational institutions, ineligible for Title IV funding to the
extent they do not meet either of the two tests. In addition, the continuing eligibility of our
educational programs for Title IV funding would be at risk due to factors beyond our control, such
as changes in the income level of persons employed in specific occupations or sectors, increases in
interest rates, changes in student mix to persons requiring higher amounts of student loans to
complete their programs, changes in student loan delinquency rates and other factors. If a
particular program ceased to be eligible for Title IV funding, in most cases it would not be
practical to continue offering that course under our current business model. Regulations in the
form proposed in the negotiated rulemaking process could result in a significant realignment of the
types of educational programs that are offered by us and by proprietary institutions in general, in
order to comply with the rules or to avoid the uncertainty associated with compliance over time.
This realignment could reduce our enrollment, perhaps materially.
In addition, for those programs that remain eligible only under the alternative basis of
student loan repayment rates, we may have to substantially increase our efforts to promote student
loan repayment in order to ensure continued Title IV eligibility. This could materially increase
our cost of doing business and/or cause us to further limit enrollment.
Impact of Rulemaking
We cannot predict the form of the rules that ultimately will be proposed by the U.S.
Department of Education for public comment, or the form of any final rules that may be adopted by
the U.S. Department of Education. As presented by the U.S. Department of Education in the
negotiated rulemaking, the rules regarding incentive compensation and gainful employment would have
a material impact on the manner in which we conduct our business. Compliance with these rules,
which if adopted could be effective as early as July 1, 2011, could reduce our enrollment, increase
our cost of doing business, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows.
50
Table of Contents
Economic Downturn
Budget constraints in states that provide state financial aid to our students could reduce the
amount of such financial aid that is available to our students, which could reduce our enrollment
and adversely affect our 90/10 Rule calculation.
Many states are experiencing severe budget deficits and constraints. Some of these states have
reduced or eliminated various student financial assistance programs, and additional states may do
so in the future. If our students who receive this type of assistance cannot secure alternate
sources of funding, they may be forced to withdraw or reduce the rate at which they seek to
complete their education. Other students who would otherwise have been eligible for state financial
assistance may not be able to enroll without such aid. This reduced funding could decrease our
enrollment and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows.
In addition, the reduction or elimination of these non-Title IV sources of student funding may
adversely affect our 90/10 Rule calculation by increasing the proportion of the affected students
funding needs satisfied by Title IV programs. This could negatively impact or increase the cost of
our compliance with the 90/10 Rule, as discussed under the Risk Factor, Our schools and programs
would lose their eligibility to participate in federal student financial aid programs if the
percentage or our revenues derived from those programs is too high in our 2009 Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase outstanding shares of Apollo Group Class A
common stock, from time to time, depending on market conditions and other considerations. On
February 18, 2010, our Board of Directors authorized a $500 million increase in the amount
available under our share repurchase program up to an aggregate amount of $1 billion of Apollo
Group Class A common stock. There is no expiration date on the repurchase authorizations and
repurchases occur at our discretion.
During the three months ended February 28, 2010, we repurchased approximately 3.4 million shares of
our Class A common stock at a total cost of approximately $200 million, representing a weighted
average purchase price of $59.61 per share. The table below details our share repurchases during
the three months ended February 28, 2010:
Total Number | ||||||||||||||||
of Shares | ||||||||||||||||
Repurchased as | ||||||||||||||||
Part of Publicly | Maximum Value | |||||||||||||||
Total # of | Average | Announced | of Shares | |||||||||||||
Shares | Price Paid | Plans or | Available for | |||||||||||||
(Numbers in thousands, except per share amounts) | Repurchased | per Share | Programs | Repurchase | ||||||||||||
Treasury stock as of November 30, 2009 |
33,603 | $ | 59.94 | 33,603 | $ | 500,000 | ||||||||||
New authorizations |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Shares repurchased |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Shares reissued |
(6 | ) | 59.94 | (6 | ) | | ||||||||||
Treasury stock as of December 31, 2009 |
33,597 | 59.94 | 33,597 | 500,000 | ||||||||||||
New authorizations |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Shares repurchased |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Shares reissued |
(43 | ) | 59.94 | (43 | ) | | ||||||||||
Treasury stock as of January 31, 2010 |
33,554 | 59.94 | 33,554 | 500,000 | ||||||||||||
New authorizations |
| | | 500,000 | ||||||||||||
Shares repurchased |
3,355 | 59.61 | 3,355 | (200,000 | ) | |||||||||||
Shares reissued |
(5 | ) | 59.91 | (5 | ) | | ||||||||||
Treasury stock as of February 28, 2010 |
36,904 | $ | 59.91 | 36,904 | $ | 800,000 | ||||||||||
51
Table of Contents
We did not have any sales of unregistered equity securities during the three months ended February
28, 2010.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
Not Applicable.
Item 4. [Reserved]
Item 5. Other Information
None.
52
Table of Contents
Item 6. Exhibits
APOLLO GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
EXHIBIT INDEX
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit | ||
Number | Exhibit Description | |
31.1
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
31.2
|
Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
31.3
|
Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
32.1
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
32.2
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
32.3
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | |
101
|
The following financial information from our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the second quarter of fiscal 2010, filed with the SEC on March 29, 2010, formatted in Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL): (i) the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of February 28, 2010 and August 31, 2009, (ii) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income for the three and six months ended February 28, 2010, and February 28, 2009, (iii) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the three and six months ended February 28, 2010, and February 28, 2009, (iv) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows from Continuing and Discontinued Operations for the six months ended February 28, 2010, and February 28, 2009, and (v) Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (tagged as blocks of text).(1) |
(1) | The XBRL related information in Exhibit 101 to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to liability of that section and shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing or other document pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing or document. |
53
Table of Contents
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
Date: March 29, 2010 |
APOLLO GROUP, INC. (Registrant) |
|||
By: | /s/ Brian L. Swartz | |||
Brian L. Swartz | ||||
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Duly Authorized Signatory) |
||||
By: | /s/ Gregory J. Iverson | |||
Gregory J. Iverson | ||||
Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer and
Controller (Principal Accounting Officer and Duly Authorized Signatory) |
||||
54