Forum for Shareholders of Farmer Bros. Co.

Forum Home Page

2007 Conclusion

Forum activities relating to Farmer Bros. Co. were suspended in 2007, following the second year of new management.

Farmer Bros. Home Page

 

Farmer Bros. Reference

 

Note: Though the article below describes a dissident shareholder's efforts relating to Warwick Valley Telephone Co. (Nasdaq: WWVY) as following the example of the Farmer Bros. Forum, there are some significant differences.  Unlike the Farmer Bros. case (and also the referenced National Presto case), the status of Warwick as an "investment company" subject to SEC regulation under the Investment Company Act of 1940 ("ICA") is complicated by arguments about how to calculate the amounts of the company's securities: the relevant Warwick holdings of securities had a book value of only $5.3 million (9% of the company's $59.5 total assets), as reported in Warwick's 10K annual report for 2003, but a presumably higher market value based on the substantial income generated.  Another difference is that the concentration of Warwick's investments in three securities may prevent qualification as a "diversified company" for regulatory and tax purposes.

 

 
 
Active or passive?
by Ron Orol
Posted 02:34 EST, 28, May 2004

Lawrence Goldstein is stepping up his efforts to boost the value of Warwick Valley Telephone Co., calling on the Securities and Exchange Commission to help him press the company to spin off a small but profitable stake in a cell-phone partnership.

Goldstein, manager of Larchmont, N.Y., hedge fund Santa Monica Partners LP, together with other funds and shareholders, has been nudging the Warwick, N.Y., telecom for more than a year to put itself up for sale or auction off its passive 7.5% stake in Orange County-Poughkeepsie MSA LP, a wholesale cell-phone company it owns with Verizon Wireless LLC.

Goldstein lately has been writing letters to SEC Chairman William Donaldson arguing that Warwick Valley has become an unregistered investment company in violation of the Investment Company Act of 1940. Companies with more than 40% of their total assets in passive investments must register with the SEC as investment companies. In a May 6 letter to the SEC, Goldstein argued that Warwick is an investment company because, by his estimate, the company's operating assets are worth $45 million while the OCP stake is worth more like $100 million, or 69% of the total assets. To back this up, Goldstein points out that Warwick Valley's operating income was $3.4 million in 2003, or just 28.5% of total income, while the $8.9 million from OCP represented 74.1%.

Warwick spokeswoman Jennifer Abelson takes issue with Goldstein, saying the company is still primarily in the business of operating a telephone company. She declined to say whether the company plans to sell its OCP stake.

In a letter to the SEC in January 2003, Warwick Valley Telephone valued the OCP stake at $22.5 million and its operating business at $91 million.

Goldstein says the company should recognize that it is an investment business and then, for tax reasons, spin off the operating company and rename the OCP stake business Warwick Capital. Separating the businesses would immediately improve the company's overall value, he says.

But Warwick's financial and legal experts have concluded that such a restructuring plan would not produce significant tax benefits, Abelson says.

Splitting the company in two, Goldstein argues, would highlight that the operating business has declined every year for the past three years. It had income of $6.7 million in 2001, $5.3 million in 2002 and only $3.4 million in 2003. Meanwhile, profit from the OCP stake has risen from $4.6 million in 2001 to $8.9 million in 2003.

Goldstein also complains about the bonuses Pike and other executives have received. But, while Pike's may have gone up 184%, it still looks like pocket change by modern corporate standards: His bonus was $11,748 on top of his $216,000 salary.

Goldstein didn't invent the investment company pressure tactic. Investors have made the same argument against Farmer Brothers Co., claiming the family-controlled Torrance, Calif., coffee company should register as an investment firm because it has a cash hoard of $282 million, or 70% of assets. The SEC has filed suit only once previously against a company operating as an investment firm. In August 2002, it sued National Presto Industries Inc., contending that the Eau Claire, Wis., maker of kitchen gadgets was primarily an investment firm. Almost two years later, the case is still being litigated.

A source close to the agency says in addition to assets, it looks at whether executives are primarily engaged in running the operating business or spend all their time making investment decisions. She notes that in Warwick's case, despite the telecom company's performance, the executives are clearly focusing their energy on the operating business.

But Pike and others may not be concentrating on the operating business enough, Goldstein says. He could sue the SEC if it doesn't act quickly, he says. "It appears the SEC isn't particularly diligent in enforcing the Investment Company Act of 1940," he says.

©Copyright 2004, The Deal, LLC. All rights reserved.

 

The Forum is open to all Farmer Bros. shareholders, whether institutional or individual, and to professionals concerned with their investment decisions.  Its purpose is to provide shareholders with access to information and a free exchange of views on issues relating to their evaluations of alternatives.  As stated in the Forum's Conditions of Participation, participants are expected to make independent use of information obtained through the Forum, subject to the privacy rights of other participants.  It is a Forum rule that participants will not be identified or quoted without their explicit permission.

There is no charge for participation.  Franklin Mutual Advisers, LLC, the manager of funds owning approximately 12.6% of Farmer Bros. shares, provided initial sponsorship for the Forum and arranged for it to be chaired by Gary Lutin.  Continuing support and guidance of the Forum is provided by an Advisory Panel of actively interested shareholders.

For additional information or to be included in an email distribution list, send an inquiry to farm@shareholderforum.com.