Hurco Companies, Inc. – Currently Listed as ‘HURC’ on the Nasdaq Stock Market

Free

Company Overview

Hurco Companies, Inc. (“HURC”) is an organisation founded in 1968, that today designs, manufactures, and sells computerized machine tools, consisting mainly of vertical machining centers (mills) and turning centers (lathes), to businesses situated within the metal cutting industry, utilizing a global sales, service, and distribution network to do so. HURC also provides “machine tool components, automation integration equipment and solutions for job shops, software options, control upgrades, accessories and replacement parts for our products, as well as customer service, training, and applications support” [3, 5]. The Company’s products are manufactured in America, China, Italy, and Taiwan, with the Business operating as a single segment: industrial automation equipment.

This Security Issue came to our attention at the price of approximately 26.41 at around early-April 2023, with drafting of this Piece beginning soon after. At the time it initially piqued our interest for several reasons, including:

  • The Company’s low P/BV ratio
  • The Company’s ‘P/E * P/BV’ figure being less than 22.5
  • The Company’s current ratio
  • The Company’s lack of long-term debt
  • The Company’s previous earnings consistency and stability
  • The Company’s cash dividend payments

Our Suspected Valuation at First Glance: Possibly ‘Silver’

 

Company Financials

All of the discussions below are based on the data presented in the Company’s SEC filings [3 – 23].

Table 2 – 1 below shows the Company’s annual net income and diluted earnings per share, alongside their three-year averages:

Table 2 – 2 below shows data extracted from HURC’s most recently published SEC filing (10-Q) [3] regarding their balance sheet:

Using the information presented in the table above (Table 2 – 2) we have constructed a new table below (Table 2 – 3), consisting of the discernible tangibles which we here find more useful. We have included the values of these assets as stated on the balance sheet, alongside three liquidation values i.e., their ‘realizable value’ as presented in ‘Security Analysis’ (pg. 560) [1]:

Table 2 – 4 below shows how many of the Company’s relative assets and liabilities (as presented in Table 2 – 3) are attributable to each of the Company’s common shares:

 

Initial Discussions Regarding the Company’s Financials

The Issue’s current ratio is 3.87 in accordance with Table 2 – 3, and Table 2 – 4 above. The best, average and worst-case scenarios are 3.19, 2.93 and 2.49 respectively, all of which are above the minimum recommended figure of 1.5. The Issue also passes the acid test in all four instances.

The Company has no long-term debt to have less than 110% of the net current asset value.

The Company has demonstrated one loss over the last decade, and it is our opinion that the earnings have been somewhat consistent. We ultimately believe the five- and 10-year averages can be taken as a reliable indication of the Issue’s previous earning power as opposed to the by-product(s) of a random assortment of numbers in spite of the fluctuations and the net loss.

The Company has an uninterrupted annual dividends streak going back to 2013.

The Company’s most recent annual earnings were smaller than those of six years prior; and looking at the three-year averages of our diluted EPS (beginning 2014) we can see that over the latest fiscal decade, the EPS decreased by approximately 81%.

The discernible tangible equity per share is 24.61 in accordance with Table 2 – 4 above; and we calculate the best, average, and worst-case scenarios to be 18.15, 15.50 and 11.49, respectively. The current price of 21.94 is greater than 120% of all of the latter three values.

 

The following points are for the more-involved investor(s)/shareholder(s); those who view common stock holdings as part-ownerships in an enterprise, irrespective of the short term public valuations, and not merely a tradable certificate “which can be sold in a matter of minutes” [2]. All of the points presented below have been factored into our valuation of this Security Issue here discussed.

Further Discussions Regarding the Company’s Financials

There were two main points we felt warranted further discussion or highlighting here as opposed to a single bullet point under the ‘Additional Observations Regarding the Company’s Filings’ subsection. Here we shall remind the reader that it is up to them and anyone else to whom it may concern, to come to their own conclusions after carefully considering the information they encounter during their own investigative works. We felt that the following two points were to be highlighted but of course some of you may naturally disagree and in your perhaps more, or even less informed opinion may have a different take on the information presented.

Recent Loss

This possibly could have been a bullet point in our ‘Additional Observations Regarding the Company’s Filings’ subsection but we though to emphasise this transgression as it had a pronounced impact on our valuations. From what we can gather from the Company, the recent loss (fiscal 2020) was primarily attributed to COVID-19 and the resultant worldwide fallout, with the 2020 10-K Filing stating the following:

During fiscal 2020, our sales and service fees were $170.6 million, a decrease of $92.8 million, or 35%, compared to fiscal 2019 and included a favorable currency impact of $0.6 million, or less than 1%, when translating foreign sales to U.S. dollars for financial reporting purposes.  For fiscal 2020, we reported a net loss of $6.2 million, or $(0.93) per diluted share, compared to net income of $17.5 million, or $2.55 per diluted share, for fiscal 2019.   The steep decline in sales volume from fiscal 2019 to fiscal 2020 reflected the significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related government-mandated stay-at-home or shelter orders that imposed operating restrictions across the globe during fiscal 2020.  The year-over-year swing from net income to net loss included a one-time, non-cash goodwill impairment charge of $4.9 million that resulted from the prolonged ongoing uncertainty in the global markets due to the COVID-19 pandemic.  Excluding the impact of this one-time charge, earnings per diluted share for fiscal 2020 would have been $0.69 higher than the earnings per diluted share we reported for fiscal year 2020. While fiscal 2020 presented significant unexpected challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we continued to focus on our long-term sustainable future, preserved by a strong balance sheet, cashflow, and continued investment in products and technologies that will create opportunity for market expansion and the potential for more strategic acquisitions in the near future. [9]

Of course some sceptics may second guess this primary prescribed cause, but that is not the reason behind us mentioning it. All of this (in the quote above) has led to our P/E ratio (using the 3-year diluted EPS average), more than doubling from what it may have been had we instead used the latest diluted EPS value. Granted there is no way to know what our P/E ratio may have been had the pandemic not occurred, and we are not suggesting the P/E ratio not be taken seriously or even amended using any type of theoretical approximation technique perhaps rooted in hypothetical materializations. We merely think it’s something to highlight as the loss had a profound effect on our entire final mathematical valuation of this Issue, and more so than in other instances where there has been a loss in the latest decade. Pedanticism is ultimately the point here. What anybody does with this consideration is up to them however.

Depreciation and Amortization

HURC is another instance of a company not making it clear where the depreciation and amortization charges are accounted for in the consolidated income statement. From looking at the consolidated statements of cash flows it’s clear the D&A charges are the same order of magnitude as the net income, making the latter possibly overstated so we would very much like to know where the relevant charges were taken into consideration. Concerning the depreciation methodology HURC continually states depreciation and amortization of assets are provided primarily (their use of the word “primarily” makes us wonder what other methodology may possibly be utilized) under the straight–line method over the shorter of the estimated useful lives or the lease terms as follows: Land is ‘indefinite’; 40 years for ‘building’(s); 7-10 years for ‘machines’; 3-7 years for ‘shop and office equipment’; 3-40 years for ‘building & leasehold improvements’. These have all been consistent throughout the latest decade and we do not have any particular issue apart from the fact that they are all ranges as opposed to concise values.

Additional Observations Regarding the Company’s Filings

Points we feel may be considered neither positive nor negative

  1. Concerning the economic downturn of 2008-2009 the Company posted a net loss in 2009 but not 2008 [25].
  2. The Business may currently be in a business cycle trough.
  3. The Business is overly conservatively capitalized so will not make for an interesting speculative purchase in this regard.
  4. We do not here suspect any corporate pyramiding.
  5. The latest 10-K Filing outlined the principles of consolidation including all wholly-owned subsidiaries but the latest 10-Q Filing did not confirm this. Since there have been no mentions of additional equity purchases in the latest 10-Q Filing we presume that the consolidated financials still represent all wholly-owned subsidiaries exclusively, although the 10-Q Filings should always confirm this.
  6. We did not note any non-recurring or one-off payments recurring for a prolonged period although in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2020, HURC recorded a one-time $4.9 million non-cash impairment charge on goodwill arising from their acquisitions, in addition to a $2.5 million goodwill impairment loss related to another business acquisition. We find these charges relatively negligible, but to more conservative viewers this may be excessive.
  7. We did not note any history of stock splits [26] or notable equity dilution.
  8. The Company has an active share repurchase plan in place although it is not entirely clear what they do with the repurchased shares e.g., cancel them or maintain them as treasury shares. Part of the reason for the confusion is because the balance sheet never mentions any treasury shares, although we do suspect some are maintained as there are differences between the number of shares issued and outstanding on the balance sheet.
  9. The Company makes use of the Monte Carlo approach when determining stock option valuations.
  10. Concerning inventory valuations, the 10-K Filings detail “inventories are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value, with cost determined using the first–in, first–out method” [5, 7, 9] as has been the case since the 2018 annual report, prior to which they were stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost determined using the first-in, first-out method.
  11. The latest 10-Q Filing’s balance sheet had ‘prepaid and other assets’ and ‘investments and other assets, net’ the full details of which were not fully detailed, thus we have not considered these in our valuations.
  12. The Company’s 10-K and 10-Q Filings have ‘investment income’ and ‘income from equity investments’ listed on their consolidated finances but the full details of these income stream’s provenance and nature is not fully disclosed in said Filings.
  13. The Company’s effective tax rates have been roughly consistent over the latest decade although not fully in line with the statutory tax rates. This is perhaps to be expected considering the Company generates a significant portion of their revenues from customers located outside of the Americas. We noticed the following tax matters we though were of the most importance:
    1. “Provision for Income Taxes. We recorded an income tax benefit of $4.6 million for fiscal 2020, compared to income tax expense of $5.8 million for fiscal 2019. During the third and fourth quarters of fiscal 2020, we assessed and recorded the year-to-date impact of recent changes in income tax laws to address the unfavorable impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”) was signed into law in the U.S. on March 27, 2020.  The CARES Act included economic relief and modifications, most notably the net operating loss carryback provisions. In addition, the year-over-year changes in our income tax benefits and expenses reflected the shift in the geographic mix of income and loss among international tax jurisdictions, which resulted in changes in foreign tax credits, deductions for foreign derived intangible income, and recording of a provision for global intangible low taxed income” [9].
    2. “In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”) was signed into law on March 27, 2020. The CARES Act, among other things, included tax provisions that we applied relating to refundable payroll tax credits, the deferral of employer’s social security payments, and modifications to net operating loss carryback provisions. We filed the net operating loss carryback claims during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2021 and received $5.4 million in tax refunds during fiscal year 2022. On December 27, 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (the “CAA”), which includes the Economic Aid to Hard-Hit Small Businesses, Nonprofits, and Venues Act and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, was signed into law and provided further COVID-19 economic relief with an expansion of the employee retention credit. As a result, we recorded operating income of $2.9 million related to the employee retention credit during fiscal 2021. We did not qualify for the employee retention credit in fiscal 2022” [5].
    3. “As of October 31, 2022, we had net operating loss carryforwards for international and U.S. income tax purposes of $5.8 million, of which $3.8 million will expire within five years beginning in fiscal year 2023 and $0.2 million are state net operating losses which will expire between five and 20 years. The remaining $1.8 million in net operating losses will be carried forward indefinitely based on current international tax laws. We also had tax credits of $0.7 million which will expire between years 2023 and 2032” [5].
  14. The Company has no large or otherwise concerning payments due in a year that may notably impact their current financial condition.
  15. There has been no recent note-worthy decline in the value of the assets (total or current).
  16. The Company is an “accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act and has been for all of the sampled 10-K Filings.
  17. The only related party transactions referenced are between the Company and their partly owned Taiwanese-based contract manufacturer, Hurco Automation, Ltd. (“HAL”).
  18. The critical audit matter in the last two 10-K Filings has been ‘Accounting for Income Taxes – Deferred Tax Assets and Liabilities’.

Points we feel may be considered negative

  1. We would not say the operations of the Company are the easiest for the layman to understand because of the technological nature of things.
  2. We would say this is a relatively small company in terms of consolidated financials.
  3. Every year the Company predicts what they expect their “capital spending” to be the following financial year, and presuming this is the same item as the “capital expenditure” they report on, then the predictions are off by a considerable margin. That being said the aforementioned verbiage difference should likely be clarified with the Company before coming to such a hard conclusion on the matter.
  4. There is a considerable institutional ownership of the common shares outstanding (52.69% at the time of writing [27]).
  5. In recent years the comprehensive income has deviated from the net income. In fiscal 2022 the difference was large, with a $19,591,000 translation loss of foreign currency financial statements, being the main factor that turned a $8,226,000 net income into a $11,558,000 comprehensive loss. This and the distribution of the Company’s assets also speaks to currency fluctuation risks potential investors may have to be weary of in this instance.
  6. The Company makes use of a lot of derivative instruments for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
  7. Dividends were paid during the loss of fiscal 2020 and were not suspended.
  8. The Company repeatedly emphasises that they are from time to time involved in claims and lawsuits; they do not disclose their nature or provide specific examples, however.
  9. We observed a few undesirable Management-related trends:
    1. There was a NEO base salary increase in fiscal 2020, the same year the Company lost money.
    2. The NEO’s compensation is rather comparable to the Company’s total income.
    3. The Company makes use of non-GAAP metrics including TSR, when determining fiscal awards for NEOs.
    4. Several of the DEF 14A Forms from the last decade have mentioned delinquency as it pertains to Section 16(a) beneficial ownership reporting compliance.

Points we feel may be considered positive

  1. The Company was founded in 1968 thus has stood the test of time.
  2. There is no dependency on a small number of customers or suppliers.
  3. The Company has made a few acquisitions in recent years but we do not believe they are dependent upon this strategy for attempted growth, and it has most certainly not led to large debt accumulation or equity dilution.
  4. Over the last fiscal decade there have been seven year-over-year increases in cash and cash equivalents, none of which have been attributed to loan proceeds.
  5. The current asset value exceeds that of the total liabilities.
  6. The Issue is currently selling for less than the value of the current assets minus all liabilities; and less than the value of the net current assets.
  7. The Company had no long-term debt listed on the latest published balance sheet.

Possible Questions for HURC’s Approximate 110 Stockholders to Consider, Investigate and/or Raise with Management

  1. Going forward can every 10-K and 10-Q Filing include all-encompassing, comprehensive breakdowns of listed asset items that constitute other assets, in particular those included in the ‘prepaid and other assets’ and ‘investments and other assets, net’ portions of the balance sheets?
  2. The Company’s 10-K and 10-Q Filings have ‘investment income’ and ‘income from equity investments’ listed on their consolidated finances, but the full details of these income stream’s provenance and nature is not fully disclosed in said filings. Can this be explained in all 10-K and 10-Q Filings going forward?
  3. The Company often re-iterates involvement in various claims and lawsuits arising in the normal course of business. Is there an established minimum estimated legal or settlement cost at which it is decided that the details of these will be provided to shareholders? And can examples of these claims and lawsuits be provided as they happen?
  4. Going forward can the Company make it clear on the income statement where the depreciation and amortization charges are accounted for?
  5. Depreciation and amortization of assets are provided primarily under the straight–line method over the shorter of the estimated useful lives or the lease terms. Considering the Company always uses the word “primarily”, is another depreciation methodology used that is not disclosed in the 10-K Filings? If so can it always be included going forward?
  6. Can exact estimated useful lifetimes of the Company’s assets be provided as opposed to ranges?
  7. How fruitful is the spending on research and development, and if it is yielding good results has any consideration been given to increasing said expenditure?
  8. Every year the Company predicts what they expect their “capital spending” to be the following financial year. Is this item the same item as the “capital expenditure” the Company reports on the following year? If so, why is the actual value often so different from the previously predicted value?
  9. Why does the consolidated statements of changes in shareholders’ equity not speak to the number of shares issued and only the number of shares outstanding or is that an error?
  10. What does the Company do with the repurchased shares?
  11. Does the Company keep any treasury shares and if so can they be mentioned on the balance sheet? If they exist, why are they currently not being mentioned?
  12. The number of holders of record of HURC’s common stock has gone from 170 in 2012 to 110 in 2022, why do Management suspect this is?
  13. Going forward can the principles of consolidation be included in the 10-Q Filings as well as the 10-K Filings?
  14. Why were dividends not suspended during fiscal 2020 when the Company lost money?
  15. The latest DEF 14A Form said $311,000 was paid to the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for “fees for other non-audit services” [4]. Can the Company say what exactly these services are?
  16. Several of the DEF 14A Forms from the last decade have mentioned delinquency as it pertains to Section 16(a) beneficial ownership reporting compliance, and a couple of the DEF 14A Forms from the latest decade did not mention the Section 16(a) beneficial ownership reporting compliance. We have two relevant questions regarding this:
    1. What is being done to keep a better handle on this going forward?
    2. Why was the compliance not mentioned in the 2020 and 2021 DEF 14A Forms and can this information always be included going forward?
  17. Was any Director or EO of the Company a founder or co-founder of the Company, or a descendant of such?

 

Valuations

The price of this Security Issue at the time of this Piece’s publication is 21.94. Using our most recent three-year average of the diluted EPS (0.38) as opposed to the most recent EPS figure (1.06) increased the P/E ratio from 20.60 to 58.38; and using our discernible tangible equity value per share (24.61) as opposed to the stated book value per share (30.14, in accordance with Table 2 – 2) has increased the P/BV ratio from 0.73 to 0.89. With that in mind and considering current federal interest rates (5.25% at the time of writing), the current price does not appear to offer a sufficient margin of safety as per Benjamin Graham’s concept i.e., “over a ten-year period the typical excess of stock earning power over bond interest may aggregate 50% of the price paid” [2]. We should now also remind the reader of some of Graham’s other thoughts regarding the ‘margin of safety’ principle, viz.:

Diversification is an established tenet of conservative investment. By accepting it so universally, investors are really demonstrating their acceptance of the margin-of-safety principle, to which diversification is the companion…It is our argument that a sufficiently low price can turn a security of mediocre quality into a sound investment opportunity provided that the buyer is informed and experienced and that he practices adequate diversification. [2]

Taking our most recent three-year average value of 0.38 for diluted EPS and our stated discernible tangible equity value per share of 24.61, and multiplying the corresponding P/E and P/BV ratios of 58.38 and 0.89 respectively, we get a figure of 52.05, which is above/below Graham’s recommended upper-limit of 22.5 (which in this instance would corroborate with a share price of approximately 14.42).

Finally, we can make the following conclusions regarding the original points that initially piqued our interest in the Issue, considering our adjustments:

  • The Company’s low P/BV ratio – still valid
  • The Company’s ‘P/E * P/BV’ figure being less than 22.5 – no longer valid
  • The Company’s current ratio – still valid
  • The Company’s lack of long-term debt – still valid
  • The Company’s previous earnings consistency and stability – still somewhat valid
  • The Company’s cash dividend payments – still somewhat valid

Whether the current price is reflective of the Company’s future, present and past, in the reader’s opinion is for the reader to decide based upon their own research, however in our opinion this Security Issue appears currently overvalued on account of its current and previous quantitative showing.

Our Valuation: Lead–

This Issued did not do bad concerning our ‘Initial Discussions Regarding the Company’s Financials’ section, and the earnings we discussed were the primary let down. If the D&A charges have been accounted for there is not much to say about this Security Issue in a negative regard apart from yet again, the P/E ratio which was notably impacted by COVID-19, ultimately dragging down the entire valuation. Had this Issue come in at a pricing point of approximately 15-19 we would likely have assigned it the next highest valuation of ‘Bronze’.

At this point in time and all matters here considered, this is a stock pick we would likely follow and would give some consideration towards adding to a stock portfolio given the correct price.

 

References

  1. Graham, B., Dodd, D.L., Security Analysis, (6th edition), (Warren, B.E., Klarman, S.A., Grant, J., Laderman, J.M., Lowenstein, R., Marks, H.S., Merkin, J.E., Berkowitz, B., Greenberg, G.H., Greenwald, B., Abrams, D), McGraw-Hill Education, 2008 – {ISBN 10: 0071592539/ISBN 13: 9780071592536 & ISBN-13: 978-0071592536/ISBN-10: 0071592539}
  2. Graham, B., The Intelligent Investor, (Revised Subsequent Edition), (Warren, B.E., Zweig, J), Harper Business, 2006 – {ISBN-10: 9780060555665 / ISBN-13: 978-0060555665}
  3. HURC’s 1st 2022 quarterly fiscal report (10-Q) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000155837023003432/hurc-20230131x10q.htm
  4. HURC’s 2023 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000110465923005763/tm234151d1_def14a.htm
  5. HURC’s 2022 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000155837023000097/hurc-20221031x10k.htm
  6. HURC’s 2022 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000110465922006772/tm223990d1_def14a.htm
  7. HURC’s 2021 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000155837022000137/hurc-20211031x10k.htm
  8. HURC’s 2021 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000110465921009214/tm214261d1_def14a.htm
  9. HURC’s 2020 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000155837021000128/hurc-20201031x10k.htm
  10. HURC’s 2020 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000110465920007109/tm205850-1_def14a.htm
  11. HURC’s 2019 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000110465920000756/tm1919823-1_10k.htm
  12. HURC’s 2019 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420419002976/tv511544_def14a.htm
  13. HURC’s 2018 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420419000709/tv509497_10k.htm
  14. HURC’s 2018 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420418004128/tv484156_def14a.htm
  15. HURC’s 2017 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420418001087/tv481726_10k.htm
  16. HURC’s 2017 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420417004479/v456934_def14a.htm
  17. HURC’s 2016 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420417001161/v455086_10k.htm
  18. HURC’s 2016 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420416076786/v429282_def14a.htm
  19. HURC’s 2015 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420416074937/v427416_10k.htm
  20. HURC’s 2015 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420415003820/v399190_def14a.htm
  21. HURC’s 2014 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420415001643/v397518_10k.htm
  22. HURC’s 2014 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420414004197/v365967_def14a.htm
  23. HURC’s 2013 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420414001644/v364037_10k.htm
  24. HURC’s 2013 proxy statement (DEF 14A) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420413003274/v331973_def14a.htm
  25. HURC’s 2012 fiscal annual report (10-K) – https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/315374/000114420413001855/v330519_10k.htm
  26. https://www.stocksplithistory.com/?symbol=hurc
  27. https://www.gurufocus.com/stock/HURC/ownership

 

Throughout this Piece, any mention of a given year’s annual report refers to the 10-K Filing/Annual Report which represents the financial year ended that same year, typically in the calendar month of October, i.e., any mention of the ‘2019 10-K Filing’ or ‘2019 Annual Report’ etc. refers to the 10-K Filing representing the fiscal year ended October 2019. The Filings are usually published a few months later, the following calendar year.

Throughout this Piece, any mention of a given year’s Proxy Statement refers to the DEF 14A Form/Proxy Statement which accompanied the most recent 10-K Filing, i.e., any mention of the ‘2020 Proxy Statement’ refers to the DEF 14A Form which accompanied the 2019 10-K Filing; usually published not too soon after the 10-K Filing (typically the same calendar month relative to the 10-K Filing’s filing date).

 

Disclaimers and Disclosures – https://wp.me/PcbS4Q-V