David L. Wenner
Analyst · Credit Suisse
Thank you, Bob. Good afternoon again, everyone. The significant gains in our operating results that Bob just cited reflects several important accomplishments in the second quarter. First and foremost, the Culver Specialty Brands acquisition continued to perform as expected, accounting for all of the sales increase in the quarter and contributing significantly to our 30.6% EBITDA increase and our 27.2% increase in net income. Through 6 months, the acquisition has added $45.1 million in net sales, slightly ahead of our previously announced guidance of $88 million. Given that new products and new distribution will begin to kick in during the second half, we are hopeful that we will continue to improve on that number by year end. We are currently launching -- working on and launching new products in 5 of the 6 Culver Brands and should begin launching those products as the second half unfolds. The second accomplishment, the quarterly results reflect continued success with our price increases, announced last September and more modestly in February of this year. Price gains are tracking slightly ahead of our projections and contributed approximately 3.3% in net sales gains for the quarter and 2.6% for the first half. Pricing, combined with cost reduction and a favorable sales mix raised the margins in our base business adding to the margin improvement realized from the Culver acquisition. That sales mix comment leads me to the third important accomplishment implicit in our results. We continue to grow the most important brands in our portfolio. Tier I brands net sales increased by 2.8% for the second quarter, driven by Ortega growth at 4.7% and Cream of Wheat growth at 4.9%. Ortega has been a stellar brand for us, growing consistently, and this quarter was no exception. Most of its growth is coming from mass merchants due to new distribution. But we are holding our own at supermarkets as well, despite the soft environment there. Cream of Wheat recovered nicely in the quarter after a soft first quarter, confirming in our opinion, that warm weather affected the brand more than anything else in that quarter. Las Palmas had an unusual decline for the quarter, which we are attributing to retailers on the West Coast, shifting the format of their stores and temporarily disrupting sales at the retailer level. Consumer trends on the brand remain very strong. Underlying these positives, of course, there was a modest volume decline in our base business sales for the quarter. A 3.6% drop that reflected a mild but broad softness in sales across most brands and specific issues with a few brands. The volume loss shows that we have not been totally immune to the general weakness in the food business, though our percent decline is meaningfully lower than many of our competitors. We have no good answers to the 2 key questions: Where are the consumers and what are they eating? But we most certainly see that price increases have influenced their behavior. Categories where we and our competitors have taken sizable price increases are more noticeably affected than others. The fruit spread category is an excellent example of this. Sweeteners and fruit costs, in general, have increased substantially in the past 12 months, and the category has seen price increases reflecting that. Our Polaner brand, which competes in that category, saw a 3.9% sales decline in the second quarter but an 11% volume decline. That number is very much in line with what competition has reported and with what Nielsen reflects at the consumer level. One reason I believe that we have not seen the overall volume drop that others have seen is that we, in general, have taken very modest price increases, and thus, have not experienced the sticker shock seen in categories such as fruit spreads. The dynamics of sales volume by channel remained much the same in the second quarter as they were in the first. Our volume issue was, in general, isolated to the traditional supermarket portion of the business and to a great degree, a handful of customers. We are seeing volume declines proportionate to the overall declines of customers who are struggling more than most in this environment, but not making up all of those lost sales at their competitors. Since our business skews somewhat to the northeast in certain brands, those brands, such as B&G and Polaner, have been more affected than most. The effect was apparently compounded in the second quarter by inventory reductions by at least 1 major customer. We assume in response to that customer's volume losses. But I would emphasize that these types of declines are the exception rather than the rule. In most cases, we are seeing flat sales in supermarkets. The difference between this environment and past years is that channel -- in this channel is that there are fewer gains to offset issues at specific retailers. Meanwhile, sales to dollar in drug stores were flat for the quarter in the base business, with several rotational events not repeating and offsetting sale -- gains in everyday baseline distribution. We expect our sales growth to resume in this channel in the third quarter with a number of new distribution events lined up for dollar stores. We do continue to make very good progress in mass merchants. Sales to these customers rose 8.2% for the quarter on distribution gains with new and existing products. The speed with which we are able to place products in this channel is a notable point of difference with the supermarket channel and may account for part of the relative performance of the 2. Supermarkets continue to extend the timing of category of use, in many cases, to well over 12 months. This, of course, limits our ability to place successful new products and take advantage of their ability to grow our sales and sales within the overall category. An example of this would be the Cinnabon Instant Cream of Wheat item, which is just now entering distribution at 1 major retailer, 1 of our top 10 customers, even though it has been in the marketplace and succeeding for nearly 2 years. As we all know, innovation is important to a branded business, but innovation that you can't get on the shelf has limited value. To the extent we have been able to place these items in mass merchants and not in supermarkets, we see a corresponding difference in sales performance. Having said that, we do expect increased success of placing new products in the second half of the year in both supermarkets and mass merchants. As I noted earlier, much of our volume decline was focused on just a few brands, with reasons beyond the general weakness in the industry. Net sales for the Tier II brands declined by 3%, a significant portion of which was due to lower sales of our tomato products under the Sclafani and Don Pepino labels. The seasonal pack for these items was severely affected last summer by the hurricane, which limited the New Jersey tomato harvest. As a result, we were short of product in this past quarter, an issue that should be resolved with this summer's harvest. Tier III brands net sales declined by 2%, in this case, significantly impacted by sales of the B&G brand, which had retail issues, as I referred to earlier, and lower food service sales and accounts where we exited the business. We anticipate that the second half will yield improved volume results, partly due to a slowly firming consumer environment and partly due to increased distribution of new and existing products. A reasonable outcome would be flat volume in the base business in third quarter and growth in the fourth quarter. New products such as chocolate-flavored Instant Cream of Wheat, Crock-Pot seasoning mixes, Emeril's alfredo sauces, Las Palmas' hot enchilada sauce and a host of new Culver offerings should help us achieve that result. The cost side of our business is playing out as expected with cost increases on commodities following our long-term commitments and other costs remaining relatively stable. In a few cases, we have been able to lower cost increases through opportunistic purchases. And our cost reduction effort continues to whittle away at the overall increase. Consistent with what we have said in prior calls, we have identified cost-reduction projects totaling roughly 4% of our manufacturing costs as possible cost savings opportunities. So far this year, we have delivered just over 30% of those savings or 1.4% of manufacturing costs. To further control costs, we are being consistent in maintaining a 12-month window on our commodity purchases and have even extended beyond that in cases where we see favorable opportunities. This posture, which has served us well in the past 18 months, appears to be the correct approach going forward. The recent decline in commodity has made it tempting to shorten positions. But corn recently demonstrated to us yet again how quickly cost can change. We remain convinced that managing to a known cost picture is the better approach to our business. Despite these efforts, there are several significant costs we have little ability to control long-term. In that vein, maple syrup, our largest single purchase, wrapped up the second quarter with a fairly neutral outcome. A poor crop in the South was offset by a good crop in the North and the structural fuel price increase in Québec was offset to a large degree by the stronger U.S. dollar. The other meaningful cost of this sort is distribution expense, which basically changes weekly. In the second quarter, this cost was essentially flat, with fuel surcharges higher than prior year early in the quarter and lower at the end. At current oil prices, we should see a modest year-over-year benefit in this expense in the second half of the year. Most of our other agricultural costs are set as the new crops are harvested in the fall. We do not foresee any unusual effects from the harvest at this point. As Bob mentioned, our SG&A expenses were up only modestly, and that's due to additional sales volume from the Culver acquisitions. Trade spending declined in total and as a percent of sales. The Culver Brands require a lower percentage of trade spending in the most brands in our portfolio, which is in line with our experience in the seasonings business. We have found with Ac'cent and other seasonings that we have that only modest and infrequent trade promotions are necessary and that deep promotions are generally ineffective. Reduction in trade spending in our base business reflects the fact that part of our net price increases came from higher promotional prices on a number of brands. Marketing expenses were down for the quarter and fairly flat for the first half, even though we spent over $3 million in marketing on the Culver brands. We did not repeat the Ortega television advertising that we executed in early 2011, judging it ineffective, and lowered the value of several coupon events on the various brands in the base business. Interestingly, we found redemption was, in some cases, higher despite the lower coupon value, perhaps a further reflection of consumers' avid interest in saving money on their food purchases. Let me anticipate a question on the M&A environment by saying that activity has increased in terms of properties being offered for sale. Typically, the properties are private or private equity-owned businesses and not brands coming out of large food companies. Short of a large transaction between major food companies that transforms one or both parties, I do not foresee large food companies selling brands in today's volume-challenged environment. We remain highly selective in terms of our requirements for a fit to our business and a strong free cash flow outcome as we examine any acquisitions. Having successfully completed the acquisition and integration of the Culver Specialty Brands into B&G Foods and given our strong balance sheet and operating performance, we believe that B&G is as ready as it has ever been to execute an acquisition quickly and effectively. With respect to our overall growth strategy, our ability to successfully execute on the Culver acquisition and to enhance margins in our base business, even in a challenging retail environment, provides further validation of our strategy, a strategy that has produced strong net sales, net income and EBITDA growth and superior shareholder returns for the past 3-plus years. As we go forward in 2012, we believe the second half of the year will bring a healthier top line result for our base business and steady improvement in our bottom line, which should be further good news for our stockholders. In light of that, we are maintaining EBITDA guidance for the full year within a range of $166 million to $170 million. The midpoint of this range represents a year-over-year EBITDA increase of 28.1%. At this point, we would like to open up the call to questions. Operator?