Filed Pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3)
Registration No. 333-164395

SUBJECT TO COMPLETION DATED MARCH 22, 2010

 

Preliminary Prospectus Supplement

(To Prospectus dated March 11, 2010)

 

 

6,000,000 Shares of Common Stock

 

The selling stockholders identified in this prospectus supplement are offering 6,000,000 shares of our common stock. We will not receive any of the proceeds from the shares of common stock sold in this offering. Our common stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol “CATM.” The last reported sale price of our common stock on March 18, 2010 was $10.32 per share.

 

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should read this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus carefully before you make your investment decision. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page S-9 of this prospectus supplement, as well as the documents we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission that are incorporated by reference herein for more information.

 

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus supplement or the accompanying prospectus is truthful and complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

 

 

The underwriters may also purchase up to an additional 900,000 shares from the selling stockholders, at the public offering price, less the underwriting discount, within 30 days from the date of this prospectus to cover overallotments, if any.

 

The underwriters expect to deliver the shares to purchasers on or about          , 2010.

 

 

Joint Book-Running Managers

 

 

Co-Managers

 

 

The date of this prospectus supplement is          , 2010.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Prospectus Supplement

 

 

Prospectus

 

 

You should rely only on the information contained or incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement, the accompanying prospectus and any free writing prospectuses we may provide to you in

connection with this offering. We and the selling stockholders have not, and the underwriters have not, authorized any other person to provide you with different information. If anyone provides you with different or inconsistent information, you should not rely on it. We and the selling stockholders are not, and the underwriters are not, making an offer to sell these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted. The information contained in this prospectus supplement, the accompanying prospectus, the documents incorporated by reference herein and any free writing prospectuses we may provide to you in connection with this offering is accurate only as of their respective dates. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may have changed since those dates.

 

This prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus are part of a registration statement that we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) using a “shelf” registration process. We are providing information to you about this offering in two parts. The first part is this prospectus supplement, which describes the specific terms of the securities that the selling stockholders are offering and also adds to, updates or changes information contained in the accompanying prospectus and the documents incorporated by reference into the accompanying prospectus. The second part is the accompanying prospectus, including the documents incorporated by reference, which provides you with more general information, some of which may not apply to this offering and some of which may have been supplemented or superseded by information in this prospectus supplement or documents incorporated or deemed to be incorporated by reference into this prospectus supplement that we filed with the SEC subsequent to the date of the prospectus. Before you invest in our securities, you should carefully read this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus and the additional information described under the heading “Documents Incorporated by Reference.”

 

Unless the context requires otherwise, all references in this prospectus to “Cardtronics,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Cardtronics, Inc. and its subsidiaries.

 

We are required to file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. You may read and copy any documents filed by us with the SEC at the SEC’s public reference room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for further information on the operation of the public reference room. Our filings with the SEC are also available to the public from commercial document retrieval services and at the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

 

We also make available free of charge on our Internet website at http://www.cardtronics.com all of the documents that we file with the SEC as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with the SEC. Information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this prospectus and you should not consider information contained on our website as part of this prospectus.

 

We “incorporate by reference” information into this prospectus supplement, which means that we disclose important information to you by referring you to another document filed separately with the SEC. The information incorporated by reference is deemed to be part of this prospectus supplement, except for any information superseded by information contained expressly in this prospectus supplement, and the information that we file later with the SEC will automatically supersede this information. You should not assume that the information in this prospectus supplement is current as of any date other than the date on the front page of this prospectus supplement.

 

We incorporate by reference the documents listed below and any future filings we make with the SEC under Sections 13(a), 13(c), 14 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) (excluding any information furnished and not filed with the SEC), including all such documents that we may

file with the SEC after the date of this prospectus supplement, until all offerings of any securities registered hereby are completed:

 

 

Any statement contained in a document incorporated or deemed to be incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement will be deemed to be modified or superseded to the extent that a statement contained herein or in any other subsequently filed document which also is or is deemed to be incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement modifies or supersedes that statement. Any statement so modified or superseded will not be deemed, except as so modified or superseded, to constitute a part of this prospectus supplement.

 

You may request a copy of any document incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement and any exhibit specifically incorporated by reference in those documents, at no cost, by writing or telephoning us at the following address or phone number:

 

Cardtronics, Inc.
Attention: Chief Financial Officer
3250 Briarpark Drive, Suite 400
Houston, Texas 77042
(832) 308-4000

 

The information in this prospectus supplement and in the documents incorporated by reference includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. The words “project,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “contemplate,” “foresee,” “would,” “could,” “plan” or other similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, which are generally not historical in nature. These forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effect on us. While management believes that these forward-looking statements are reasonable as and when made, there can be no assurance that future developments affecting us will be those that we currently anticipate. All comments concerning our expectations for future revenues and operating results are based on our forecasts for our existing operations and do not include the potential impact of any future acquisitions. Our forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties (some of which are beyond our control) and assumptions that could cause actual results to differ materially from our historical experience and our present expectations or projections.

 

Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, those summarized below:

 

 

The information contained in this prospectus supplement, including the information set forth under the heading “Risk Factors,” identifies factors that could affect our operating results and performance. When considering forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind these factors and other cautionary statements in this prospectus supplement and in the documents incorporated herein by reference. Should one or more of the risks or uncertainties described above or elsewhere in this prospectus supplement or in the documents incorporated by reference occur, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results and plans could differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements. We urge you to carefully consider those factors, as well as factors described in our reports filed from time to time with the SEC and other announcements we make from time to time.

 

SUMMARY

	•	the dollar volume of cash used in the United States economy is large and growing;
	•	United States banks are seeking to increase customer touch points in a cost-effective manner, and provide convenient, surcharge-free access to ATMs;
	•	there has been a recent proliferation in the number of prepaid debit cards, especially in the United States, that can be used at our ATMs;
	•	recent increases in the fees charged by large United States financial institutions for non-customers to use their ATMs have provided us with an opportunity to increase the fees we charge on our ATMs and increased the value proposition of our Allpoint surcharge-free network;
	•	demand for automated consumer financial services beyond basic banking services continues to increase;
	•	outsourcing by financial institutions of non-core operations such as the management of their ATM fleets could provide us with additional revenue opportunities; and
	•	the continuing under-penetration of ATMs in many international markets.

Common stock offered by the selling stockholders		6,000,000 shares
Common stock to be outstanding after the offering		41,658,756 shares
Overallotment option		The selling stockholders have granted the underwriters the right to purchase up to an additional 900,000 shares to cover overallotments, if any, within 30 days from the date of this prospectus.
Use of proceeds		We will not receive any of the proceeds from this offering.
Dividend policy		We do not currently and do not expect to pay dividends on our common stock for the foreseeable future.
NASDAQ Global Market symbol for our common stock		CATM
Risk Factors		Investing in our common stock involves risks. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page S-9 of this prospectus supplement for a discussion of factors that you should carefully consider before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock.

	•	3,763,487 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of stock options outstanding as of March 15, 2010, at a weighted average exercise price of $8.44; and
	•	584,777 shares of common stock reserved for issuance under our 2007 equity incentive compensation plan.

		For the Years Ended December 31,
		2007				2008				2009
		(In thousands, except share and per share information, number of devices, and transactions per device)
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
ATM operating revenues		$	365,322			$	475,800			$	483,138
Total revenues			378,298				493,014				493,353
Gross profit (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization expense)(1)			84,651				114,473				148,879
Income (loss) from operations(2)			7,158				(38,118	)			43,000
Net income (loss)(2)			(27,857	)			(72,397	)			5,771
Net income (loss) attributable to controlling interests and available to common stockholders(2)(3)			(63,753	)			(71,375	)			5,277
Share and Per Share Data:
Basic and diluted net income (loss) per common share		$	(4.13	)		$	(1.84	)		$	0.13
Basic weighted average shares outstanding			15,423,744				38,800,782				39,244,057
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding			15,423,744				38,800,782				39,896,366
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
Total cash and cash equivalents		$	13,439			$	3,424			$	10,449
Total assets			590,737				480,828				460,404
Total long-term debt and capital lease obligations, including current portion			310,744				347,181				307,287
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)			106,720				(19,750	)			(1,290	)
Other Financial Data (Unaudited):
Adjusted EBITDA(4)		$	60,582			$	81,939			$	110,376
Capital expenditures, excluding acquisitions(5)			70,959				60,133				26,031
Interest expense, net			29,523				31,090				30,133
Operating Data (Unaudited):
Average number of transacting Company-owned devices(6)			20,732				22,215				22,871
Average number of total transacting devices(6)			28,277				32,856				33,059
Total transactions			247,270				354,391				383,323
Total cash withdrawal transactions			166,248				228,306				244,378
Amounts per device per month:
ATM operating revenues		$	1,076			$	1,207			$	1,218
Cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization)(7)(8)			829				921				842
ATM operating gross profit(9)		$	247			$	286			$	376
ATM operating gross profit margin (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization)(7)			22.9	%			23.7	%			30.9	%
Total transactions			729				899				966
Total cash withdrawal transactions			490				579				616

(1)		“Gross Profit” amounts exclude depreciation, accretion, and amortization expense of $43.1 million, $52.4 million, and $51.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively.

(2)		For the year ended December 31, 2008, amounts include a $50.0 million goodwill impairment charge associated with our United Kingdom operations.

(3)		For the year ended December 31, 2007, net loss attributable to controlling interests and available to common stockholders reflects a $36.0 million one-time, non-cash charge associated with the conversion of our Series B redeemable convertible preferred stock into shares of common stock in conjunction with our initial public offering in December 2007, and the accretion of issuance costs associated with the Series B redeemable convertible preferred stock.
(4)		Adjusted EBITDA represents net income (loss) before interest expense, income tax expense, and depreciation, accretion and amortization expense, as well as adjustments for certain non-cash and non-recurring items, as defined in our revolving credit facility. For the year ended December 31, 2008, Adjusted EBITDA also excluded a $50.0 million impairment charge of the goodwill associated with our United Kingdom operation. This charge has been excluded as goodwill and associated write-downs would be company-specific and management believes the inclusion of such a charge in Adjusted EBITDA would not contribute to its understanding of the operating results and effectiveness of its business. Adjusted EBITDA, as we define it, may not be comparable to similarly titled measures employed by other companies and is not a measure of performance calculated in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”). Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for operating income, net income, cash flows from operating, investing, and financing activities or other income or cash flow statement data prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP.
		We believe Adjusted EBITDA is useful to an equity investor in evaluating our operating performance because:

	•	it is used by investors to measure a company’s operating performance without regard to items such as interest expense, depreciation, accretion, and amortization, which can vary substantially from company to company within our industry depending upon accounting methods and book values of assets, capital structures and the method by which the assets were acquired; and
	•	it helps investors to more meaningfully evaluate and compare the results of our operations from period to period by removing the impact of our capital structure and asset base from our operating results.

		Our management uses Adjusted EBITDA:

	•	as a measure of operating performance because it assists them in comparing our performance on a consistent basis as it removes the impact of our capital structure and asset base from our operating results;
	•	as a measure for planning and forecasting overall expectations and for evaluating actual results against such expectations;
	•	to assess compliance with financial ratios and covenants included in our credit agreement;
	•	in communications with lenders concerning our financial performance; and
	•	as a performance measure by which our management is evaluated and compensated.

		Management compensates for the limitations of Adjusted EBITDA as an analytical tool by reviewing the comparable U.S. GAAP measures, understanding the differences between the measures, and incorporating this knowledge into management’s decision-making process.
		The following table provides a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net income (loss), its most directly comparable U.S. GAAP financial measure, for each of the periods presented:

		Years Ended December 31,
		2007				2008				2009
		(In thousands)
Net income (loss) attributable to controlling interests		$	(27,481	)		$	(71,375	)		$	5,277
Income tax expense			4,477				989				4,245
Interest expense, including amortization of deferred financing costs and bond discounts			31,164				33,197				32,528
Goodwill impairment charge			—				50,003				—
Amortization expense			18,870				18,549				18,916
Depreciation and accretion expense			26,781				39,164				39,420
EBITDA		$	53,811			$	70,527			$	100,386

		Years Ended December 31,
		2007				2008				2009
		(In thousands)
Add back:
Loss on disposal of assets		$	2,485			$	5,807			$	6,016
Other expense			(626	)			93				(982	)
Noncontrolling interest			(169	)			(1,633	)			(1,281	)
Stock-based compensation expense			1,050				3,516				4,620
Adjustments to cost of ATM operating revenues(a)			3,236				2,911				154
Adjustments to selling, general, and administrative expenses(a)			795				718				1,463
Adjusted EBITDA		$	60,582			$	81,939			$	110,376

(a)		Adjustments to cost of ATM operating revenues for 2007 and 2008 primarily consisted of costs associated with the conversion of our ATMs over to our in-house EFT processing platform and, in 2008, start-up costs associated with our in-house armored operation in the United Kingdom. Adjustments to selling, general, and administrative expenses primarily consisted of litigation settlement costs in 2007, the write-off of certain acquisition-related costs in 2008, and the recognition of $1.2 million in severance costs associated with the departure of our former Chief Executive Officer in 2009.

(5)		Capital expenditure amounts for Cardtronics Mexico are reflected gross of any noncontrolling interest amounts.
(6)		The historical 2007 average number of transacting Company-owned devices and total transacting devices include the devices acquired in our acquisition of the 7-Eleven, Inc. financial services business beginning from the acquisition date (July 20, 2007) and continuing through the end of the year.
(7)		Excludes effects of depreciation, accretion, and amortization expense of $43.1 million, $52.4 million, and $51.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively. The inclusion of this depreciation, accretion, and amortization expense in “Cost of ATM operating revenues” would have increased our cost of ATM operating revenues per ATM per month and decreased our ATM operating gross profit per ATM per month by $127, $133, and $130 for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively. Additionally, our ATM operating gross profit margin would have been 11.1%, 12.7%, and 20.2% for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively.
(8)		The decline in the Cost of ATM operating revenues per ATM per month from 2008 to 2009 was due to foreign currency exchange rate movements between the two periods, lower vault cash interest costs, and other operating cost reductions as a result of better pricing terms under the renegotiated contracts with our maintenance and armored service providers.
(9)		ATM operating gross profit is a measure of profitability that uses only the revenue and expenses that related to operating the ATMs. The revenue and expenses from ATM equipment sales and other ATM-related services are not included.

 

Investing in our common stock involves risks. You should carefully considering the risks described below together with the other information contained in, or incorporated by reference into, this prospectus supplement, before you decide to buy the common stock offered by this prospectus supplement. We believe that the risks and uncertainties described below are the material risks and uncertainties facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we currently deem immaterial, also may become important factors that affect us. If any of the following risks occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations or future growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected. In that case, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose some or all of your investment.

 

Risks Related to Our Business

 

We depend on ATM and financial services transaction fees for substantially all of our revenues, and our revenues and profits would be reduced by a decline in the usage of our ATMs and financial services kiosks or a decline in the number of devices that we operate, whether as a result of global economic conditions or otherwise.

 

Transaction fees charged to cardholders and their financial institutions for transactions processed on our ATMs and financial services kiosks, including surcharge and interchange transaction fees, have historically accounted for most of our revenues. We expect that transaction fees, including fees we receive through our bank branding and surcharge-free network offerings, will continue to account for a substantial majority of our revenues for the foreseeable future. Consequently, our future operating results will depend on (i) the continued market acceptance of our services in our target markets, (ii) maintaining the level of transaction fees we receive, (iii) our ability to install, acquire, operate, and retain more devices, (iv) continued usage of our devices by cardholders, and (v) our ability to continue to expand our surcharge-free and other consumer financial services offerings. If alternative technologies to our services are successfully developed and implemented, we will likely experience a decline in the usage of our devices. Surcharge fees, which are determined through negotiations between us and our merchant partners, could be reduced over time. Further, growth in surcharge-free ATM networks and widespread consumer bias toward these networks could adversely affect our revenues, even though we maintain our own surcharge-free offerings. Many of our devices are utilized by consumers that frequent the retail establishments in which our devices are located, including convenience stores, malls, grocery stores, and other large retailers. If there is a significant slowdown in consumer spending, and the number of consumers that frequent the retail establishments in which we operate our devices declines significantly, the number of transactions conducted on those devices, and the corresponding transaction fees we earn, may also decline.

 

Although we experienced an increase in our monthly ATM operating revenues per device during 2009, we cannot assure you that our transaction revenues will not decline in the future. A decline in usage of our devices by cardholders or in the levels of fees received by us in connection with this usage, or a decline in the number of devices that we operate, would have a negative impact on our revenues and would limit our future growth.

 

In the United States, the proliferation of payment options other than cash, including credit cards, debit cards, and prepaid debit cards, could result in a reduced need for cash in the marketplace and a resulting decline in the usage of our ATMs.

 

The United States has seen a shift in consumer payment trends since the late 1990s, with more customers now opting for electronic forms of payment (e.g., credit cards and debit cards) for their in-store purchases over traditional paper-based forms of payment (e.g., cash and checks). Additionally, merchants are now offering free cash back at the point-of-sale for customers that utilize debit cards for their purchases, thus providing an additional incentive for consumers to use these cards. According to the Nilson Report from 2003 to 2008, cash transaction counts declined from approximately 41% of all payment transactions in 2003 to approximately 34% in 2008, with declines also seen in checks usage as credit and debit card transactions increased. However, in terms of absolute dollar value, the volume of cash used in payment transactions increased from $1.3 trillion

in 2003 to $1.6 trillion in 2008. Furthermore, during 2009, we saw an increase in the number of cash withdrawal transactions conducted on our domestic ATMs, in part due to the proliferation of prepaid debit cards, thus implying a continued demand for cash and convenient, reliable access to that cash. Regardless, the continued growth in electronic payment methods could result in a reduced need for cash in the marketplace and ultimately, a decline in the usage of our ATMs.

 

Interchange fees, which comprise a substantial portion of our transaction revenues, may be lowered at the discretion of the various EFT networks through which our transactions are routed, or through potential regulatory changes, thus reducing our future revenues.

 

Interchange fees, which represented approximately 31% of our total ATM operating revenues for the year ended December 31, 2009, are set by the various EFT networks through which transactions conducted on our devices are routed. Interchange fees are set by each network and typically vary from one network to the next. Additionally, certain EFT networks, primarily Visa and MasterCard, have recently increased their transaction fees charged to ATM operators for transactions routed through their networks, thereby offsetting a portion of the interchange fees received by the ATM operators. Accordingly, if some or all of the networks through which our ATM transactions are routed were to reduce the interchange rates paid to us or increase their transaction fees charged to us for routing transactions across their network, or both, our future transaction revenues and related profits would decline. Additionally, some federal officials have expressed concern that consumers using an ATM may not be aware that in addition to paying the surcharge fee that is disclosed to them at the ATM, their financial institution may also assess an additional fee to offset any interchange fee assessed to the financial institution with regard to that consumer’s transaction. Any potential future legislation that affects the amount of interchange fees that can be assessed on a transaction may adversely affect our revenues. Historically, we have been successful in offsetting the effects of any such reductions in net interchange fees received by us through changes in our business. However, we can give no assurances that we will be successful in offsetting the effects of any future reductions in the interchange fees received by us, if and when they occur.

 

Deterioration in global credit markets could have a negative impact on financial institutions that we conduct business with.

 

We have a significant number of customer and vendor relationships with financial institutions in all of our key markets, including relationships in which those financial institutions pay us for the right to place their brands on our devices. Additionally, we rely on a small number of financial institution partners to provide us with the cash that we maintain in our Company-owned devices. Turmoil in the global credit markets in the future, such as the one recently experienced, may have a negative impact on those financial institutions and our relationships with them. In particular, if the liquidity positions of the financial institutions with which we conduct business deteriorate significantly, these institutions may be unable to perform under their existing agreements with us. If these defaults were to occur, we may not be successful in our efforts to identify new branding partners and cash providers, and the underlying economics of any new arrangements may not be consistent with our current arrangements. Furthermore, if our existing bank branding partners or cash providers are acquired by other institutions with assistance from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (“FDIC”), or placed into receivership by the FDIC, it is possible that our agreements may be rejected in part or in their entirety. If these situations were to occur, and we were unsuccessful in our efforts to enter into similar agreements, our future financial results would be negatively impacted.

 

Further consolidations within the banking industry may impact our branding relationships as existing branding customers are acquired by other, more stable financial institutions, some of which may not be existing branding customers.

 

In recent years, an unprecedented amount of consolidation unfolded within the United States banking industry. For example, Washington Mutual, which had over 950 ATMs branded with us, was acquired by JPMorgan Chase, an existing branding customer of ours, in 2008. Additionally, Wachovia, which had 15 high-transaction ATMs branded with us, was acquired by Wells Fargo, a bank that was not an existing branding

customer of ours, at the end of 2008. Furthermore, in 2009, Sovereign Bank, which currently has over 1,150 ATMs branded with us, was acquired by Banco Santander, one of the largest banks in Europe. Although our branding contracts were largely unaffected by these transactions, we cannot assure you that they will remain unaffected by future consolidations that may occur within the banking industry, and in particular, our branding partners.

 

We rely on third parties to provide us with the cash we require to operate many of our devices. If these third parties were unable or unwilling to provide us with the necessary cash to operate our devices, we would need to locate alternative sources of cash to operate our devices or we would not be able to operate our business.

 

In the United States, we rely on Bank of America, N.A. (“Bank of America”), Wells Fargo, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”), and US Bancorp (“US Bank”) to provide us with the cash that we use in over 18,000 of our domestic devices where cash is not provided by the merchant (“vault cash”). In the United Kingdom, we rely on Alliance & Leicester Commercial Bank (“ALCB”) to provide us with the vault cash that we use in over 2,500 of our ATMs. Finally, S.A. Institución de Banca Multiple (“Bansi”) is our sole vault cash provider in Mexico and provides us with the cash that we use in over 2,300 of our ATMs in that market. Under our vault cash rental agreements with these providers, we pay a vault cash rental fee based on the total amount of vault cash that we are using at any given time. As of December 31, 2009, the balance of vault cash held in our United States, United Kingdom, and Mexico ATMs and financial services kiosks was approximately $895.4 million, $194.9 million, and $41.3 million, respectively.

 

Under our vault cash rental agreements, at all times during this process, beneficial ownership of the cash is retained by the cash providers, and we have no access or right to the cash except for those ATMs that are serviced by our wholly-owned armored courier operation in the United Kingdom. While our armored courier operation has physical access to the cash loaded in those machines, beneficial ownership of that cash remains with the cash provider at all times.

 

Our existing vault cash rental agreements expire at various times from March 2011 through December 2013. However, each provider has the right to demand the return of all or any portion of its cash at any time upon the occurrence of certain events beyond our control, including certain bankruptcy events of us or our subsidiaries, or a breach of the terms of our cash provider agreements. Other key terms of our agreements include the requirement that the cash providers provide written notice of their intent not to renew. Such notice provisions typically require a minimum of 180 to 360 days’ notice prior to the actual termination date. If such notice is not received, then the contracts will typically automatically renew for an additional one-year period. Additionally, our contract with one of our vault cash providers contains a provision that allows the provider to modify the pricing terms contained within the agreement at any time with 90 days prior written notice. However, in the event both parties do not agree to the pricing modifications, then either party may provide 180 days prior written notice of its intent to terminate.

 

If our vault cash providers were to demand return of their cash or terminate their arrangements with us and remove their cash from our devices, or if they fail to provide us with cash as and when we need it for our operations, our ability to operate our devices would be jeopardized, and we would need to locate alternative sources of vault cash. In the event this was to happen, the terms and conditions of the new or renewed agreements could potentially be less favorable to us, which would negatively impact our results of operations.

 

We derive a substantial portion of our revenue from devices placed with a small number of merchants. If one or more of our top merchants were to cease doing business with us, or to substantially reduce its dealings with us, our revenues could decline.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2009, we derived 49.0% of our total revenues from ATMs and financial services kiosks placed at the locations of our five largest merchant customers. For the year ended December 31, 2009, our top five merchants (based on our total revenues) were 7-Eleven, Inc. (“7-Eleven”), CVS Caremark Corporation (“CVS”), Walgreen Co. (“Walgreens”), Target Corporation (“Target”), and Hess Corporation (“Hess”). 7-Eleven, which is the single largest merchant customer in our portfolio, comprised approximately

31% of our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2009. Accordingly, a significant percentage of our future revenues and operating income will be dependent upon the successful continuation of our relationship with 7-Eleven as well as our other top merchants.

 

The loss of any of our largest merchants or a decision by any one of them to reduce the number of our devices placed in their locations would result in a decline in our revenues. Furthermore, if their financial condition were to deteriorate in the future and, as a result, one of more of these merchants was required to close a significant number of their domestic store locations, our revenues would be significantly impacted. Additionally, these merchants may elect not to renew their contracts when they expire. The contracts we have with our top five merchants have expiration dates of July 20, 2017; August 22, 2012; December 31, 2013; January 31, 2016; and December 31, 2013, respectively. Even if such contracts are renewed, the renewal terms may be less favorable to us than the current contracts. If any of our five largest merchants enters bankruptcy proceedings and rejects its contract with us, fails to renew its contract upon expiration, or if the renewal terms with any of them are less favorable to us than under our current contracts, it could result in a decline in our revenues and gross profits.

 

In May 2009, we settled a long-standing lawsuit with one of our merchant customers who was the seventh and fifth largest merchant customer in our portfolio (based on revenues) during the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. In accordance with the settlement, our placement agreement with this merchant and the related bank branding agreement associated with those ATMs were terminated. As a result of this loss, our revenues were negatively impacted during 2009 and will continue to be negatively impacted in the future. Any additional losses of our large merchant customers could result in further declines in our revenues and gross profits.

 

A substantial portion of our revenues and operating profits are generated by our merchant relationship with 7-Eleven. Accordingly, if 7-Eleven’s financial condition deteriorates in the future and it is required to close some or all of its store locations, or if our placement agreement with 7-Eleven expires or is terminated, our future financial results would be significantly impaired.

 

7-Eleven is the single largest merchant customer in our portfolio, representing approximately 31% of our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2009. Accordingly, a significant percentage of our future revenues and operating income will be dependent upon the successful continuation of our relationship with 7-Eleven. If 7-Eleven’s financial condition were to deteriorate in the future and, as a result, it was required to close a significant number of its domestic store locations, our financial results would be significantly impacted. Additionally, while the underlying placement agreement with 7-Eleven has an initial term of ten years, we may not be successful in renewing such agreement with 7-Eleven upon the end of that initial term, or such renewal may occur with terms and conditions that are not as favorable to us as those contained in the current agreement. Furthermore, the placement agreement executed with 7-Eleven contains certain terms and conditions that, if we fail to meet such terms and conditions, gives 7-Eleven the right to terminate the placement agreement or our exclusive right to provide certain services.

 

We rely on EFT network providers, transaction processors, armored courier providers, and maintenance providers; if they fail or no longer agree to provide their services, we could suffer a temporary loss of transaction revenues or the permanent loss of any merchant contract affected by such disruption.

 

We rely on EFT network providers and have agreements with transaction processors, armored courier providers, and maintenance providers and have more than one such provider in each of these key areas. These providers enable us to provide card authorization, data capture, settlement, and cash management and maintenance services to the merchants we serve. Typically, these agreements are for periods of up to two or three years each. If we improperly manage the renewal or replacement of any expiring vendor contract, or if our multiple providers in any one key area failed to provide the services for which we have contracted and disruption of service to our merchants occurs, our relationship with those merchants could suffer.

 

For example, during the fourth quarter of 2007 and the full year of 2008, our results of operations were negatively impacted by a higher percentage of downtime experienced by our ATMs in the United Kingdom as

a result of certain third-party service-related issues. If such disruption of service should recur, our relationships with the affected merchants could be materially negatively impacted. Furthermore, any disruptions in service in any of our markets, whether caused by us or by third party providers, may result in a loss of revenues under certain of our contractual arrangements that contain minimum service-level requirements.

 

Additionally, in February 2010, Mt. Vernon Money Center (“MVMC”), one of our third-party armored service providers in the Northeast, ceased all cash replenishment operations for its customers following the arrest on charges of bank fraud of its founder and principal owner. Following that arrest, it is our understanding that the FBI seized all vault cash in the possession of MVMC. A few days later, the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York (the “Court”) appointed a receiver (the “Receiver”) to, among other things, seize all of the other assets in the possession of MVMC. While we currently do not believe that this event will have a material adverse affect on our operations, we were required to convert over 1,000 ATMs that were being serviced by MVMC to another third-party armored service provider, resulting in a minor amount of downtime being experienced by those ATMs. Further, based upon the Receiver’s report dated March 1, 2010, and filed with the Court on that same date, it appears that some of the vault cash that was delivered to MVMC on our behalf was either commingled with vault cash belonging to MVMC’s other customers or was misappropriated by MVMC. Regardless, we currently believe that our existing insurance policies will cover any cash losses that we may incur resulting from this incident, less any deductible payments required to be paid by us under such policies. If it is ultimately determined that we have suffered cash losses in connection with this incident, the timing of recognition of such losses and the related insurance reimbursement amounts may not coincide.

 

If we, our transaction processors, our EFT networks or other service providers experience system failures, the products and services we provide could be delayed or interrupted, which would harm our business.

 

Our ability to provide reliable service largely depends on the efficient and uninterrupted operations of our EFT transaction processing platform, third-party transaction processors, telecommunications network systems, and other service providers. Accordingly, any significant interruptions could severely harm our business and reputation and result in a loss of revenues. Additionally, if any such interruption is caused by us, especially in those situations in which we serve as the primary transaction processor, such interruption could result in the loss of the affected merchants or damage our relationships with such merchants. Our systems and operations and those of our transaction processors and our EFT network and other service providers could be exposed to damage or interruption from fire, natural disaster, unlawful acts, terrorist attacks, power loss, telecommunications failure, unauthorized entry, and computer viruses. We cannot be certain that any measures we and our service providers have taken to prevent system failures will be successful or that we will not experience service interruptions.

 

The armored transport business exposes us to additional risks beyond those currently experienced by us in the ownership and operation of ATMs.

 

During 2008, we implemented our own armored courier operation in the United Kingdom. We are currently providing armored services to over 780 of our ATMs in that market and expect to transition approximately 800 additional locations over to our operation during 2010 by opening a second depot in that market. The armored transport business exposes us to significant risks, including the potential for cash-in-transit losses, as well as claims for personal injury, wrongful death, worker’s compensation, punitive damages, and general liability. While we will seek to maintain appropriate levels of insurance to adequately protect us from these risks, there can be no assurance that we will avoid significant future claims or adverse publicity related thereto. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that our insurance coverage will be adequate to cover potential liabilities or that insurance coverage will remain available at costs that are acceptable to us. The availability of quality and reliable insurance coverage is an important factor in our ability to successfully operate this aspect of our operations. A successful claim brought against us for which coverage is denied or that is in excess of our insurance coverage could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Security breaches could harm our business by compromising customer information and disrupting our transaction processing services, thus damaging our relationships with our merchant customers and exposing us to liability.

 

As part of our transaction processing services, we electronically process and transmit sensitive cardholder information. In recent years, companies that process and transmit this information have been specifically and increasingly targeted by sophisticated criminal organizations in an effort to obtain the information and utilize it for fraudulent transactions. Unauthorized access to our computer systems, or those of our third-party service providers, could result in the theft or publication of the information or the deletion or modification of sensitive records, and could cause interruptions in our operations. While the security risks outlined above are mitigated by the use of encryption and other techniques, any inability to prevent security breaches could damage our relationships with our merchant customers and expose us to liability.

 

Computer viruses could harm our business by disrupting our transaction processing services, causing noncompliance with network rules and damaging our relationships with our merchant customers.

 

Computer viruses could infiltrate our systems, thus disrupting our delivery of services and making our applications unavailable. Although we utilize several preventative and detective security controls in our network, any inability to prevent computer viruses could damage our relationships with our merchant customers and cause us to be in non-compliance with applicable network rules and regulations.

 

Operational failures in our EFT transaction processing facilities could harm our business and our relationships with our merchant customers.

 

An operational failure in our EFT transaction processing facilities could harm our business and damage our relationships with our merchant customers. Damage or destruction that interrupts our transaction processing services could damage our relationships with our merchant customers and could cause us to incur substantial additional expense to repair or replace damaged equipment. We have installed back-up systems and procedures to prevent or react to such disruptions. However, a prolonged interruption of our services or network that extends for more than several hours (i.e., where our backup systems are not able to recover) could result in data loss or a reduction in revenues as our devices would be unable to process transactions. In addition, a significant interruption of service could have a negative impact on our reputation and could cause our present and potential merchant customers to choose alternative service providers.

 

Errors or omissions in the settlement of merchant funds could damage our relationships with our merchant customers and expose us to liability.

 

We are responsible for maintaining accurate bank account information for our merchant customers and accurate settlements of funds into these accounts based on the underlying transaction activity. This process relies on accurate and authorized maintenance of electronic records. Although we have certain controls in place to help ensure the safety and accuracy of our records, errors or unauthorized changes to these records could result in the erroneous or fraudulent movement of funds, thus damaging our relationships with our merchant customers and exposing us to liability.

 

The inaccurate settlement of funds between the various parties to our ATM transactions could harm our business and our relationships with our merchants.

 

As of December 31, 2009, we had transitioned a majority of our Company- and merchant-owned devices from third-party processors to our own EFT transaction processing platform, with the exception of roughly 3,600 ATMs that were under contract with a third-party processing organization through the end of 2009. These remaining ATMs are scheduled to be converted over to our own EFT transaction processing platform by the second quarter of 2010. If not performed properly, the processing of transactions conducted on our devices could result in the inaccurate settlement of funds between the various parties to those transactions and expose us to increased liability.

Changes in interest rates could increase our operating costs by increasing interest expense under our credit facilities and our vault cash rental costs.

 

Interest on amounts borrowed under our revolving and swing line credit facilities is based on floating interest rates, and our vault cash rental expense is based on market interest rates. As a result, our interest expense and cash management costs are sensitive to changes in interest rates. Vault cash is the cash we use in our machines in cases where cash is not provided by the merchant. We pay rental fees on the average amount of vault cash outstanding in our ATMs under floating rate formulas based on the LIBOR to Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and US Bank in the United States and ALCB in the United Kingdom. Additionally, in Mexico, we pay a monthly rental fee to our vault cash provider under a formula based on the Mexican Interbank Rate. Although we currently hedge a significant portion of our vault cash interest rate risk related to our operations in the United States and in the United Kingdom through December 31, 2013, we may not be able to enter into similar arrangements for similar amounts in the future. Furthermore, we have not currently entered into any derivative financial instruments to hedge our variable interest rate exposure in Mexico. Any significant future increases in interest rates could have a negative impact on our earnings and cash flow by increasing our operating costs and expenses. See “Part II, Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk — Disclosure about Market Risk — Interest Rate Risk” in our 2009 Form 10-K.

 

We maintain a significant amount of cash within our Company-owned devices, which is subject to potential loss due to theft or other events, including natural disasters.

 

As of December 31, 2009, there was approximately $1.1 billion in vault cash held in our domestic and international devices. Although legal and equitable title to such cash is held by the cash providers, any loss of such cash from our ATMs through theft or other means is typically our responsibility. We typically require that our cash service providers maintain adequate insurance coverage in the event cash losses occur as a result of misconduct or negligence on the part of such providers. However, we also maintain our own insurance policies to cover a significant portion of any losses that may occur that may ultimately not be covered by the insurance policies maintained by our service providers. In the event we incur losses that are covered by our insurance carriers, we will be required to fund a portion of those losses through the payment of any related deductible amounts under those policies. Furthermore, any increase in the frequency and/or amounts of such thefts and losses could negatively impact our operating results as a result of higher deductible payments and increased insurance premiums. Additionally, any damage sustained to our merchant customers’ store locations in connection with any ATM-related thefts, if extensive and frequent enough in nature, could negatively impact our relationships with such merchants and impair our ability to deploy additional ATMs in those locations (or new locations) with those merchants in the future. Finally, impacted merchants may request, and have requested on a limited basis, that we remove ATMs from store locations that have suffered damage as a result of ATM-related thefts, thus negatively impacting our financial results.

 

The ATM industry is highly competitive and such competition may increase, which may adversely affect our profit margins.

 

The ATM business is and can be expected to remain highly competitive. Our principal competition comes from independent ATM companies in the United States and the United Kingdom, and national and regional financial institutions in the United Kingdom and Mexico. Additionally, we experience competition from national and regional financial institutions in the United States that are not currently bank branding customers or members of our Allpoint surcharge-free ATM network. Our competitors could prevent us from obtaining or maintaining desirable locations for our devices, cause us to reduce the surcharge revenue generated by transactions at our devices, or cause us to pay higher merchant fees, thereby reducing our profits. In addition to our current competitors, additional competitors may enter the market. We can offer no assurance that we will be able to compete effectively against these current and future competitors. Increased competition could result in transaction fee reductions, reduced gross margins and loss of market share.

 

The election of our merchant customers to not participate in our surcharge-free network offerings could impact the networks’ effectiveness, which would negatively impact our financial results.

 

Financial institutions that are members of Allpoint pay a fee in exchange for allowing their cardholders to use selected Cardtronics owned and/or managed ATMs on a surcharge-free basis. The success of Allpoint is dependent upon the participation by our merchant customers in such network. In the event a significant number of our merchants elect not to participate Allpoint, the benefits and effectiveness of that network would be diminished, thus potentially causing some of the participating financial institutions to not renew their agreements with us, and thereby negatively impacting our financial results.

 

We may be unable to integrate our future acquisitions in an efficient manner and inefficiencies would increase our cost of operations and reduce our profitability.

 

We have been an active business acquirer both in the United States and internationally, and may continue to be active in the future. The acquisition and integration of businesses involves a number of risks. The core risks are in the areas of valuation (negotiating a fair price for the business based on inherently limited due diligence) and integration (managing the complex process of integrating the acquired company’s people, products, technology and other assets so as to realize the projected value of the acquired company and the synergies projected to be realized in connection with the acquisition).

 

The process of integrating operations could cause an interruption of, or loss of momentum in, the activities of one or more of our combined businesses and the possible loss of key personnel. The diversion of management’s attention and any delays or difficulties encountered in connection with acquisitions and the integration of the two companies’ operations could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition or prospects.

 

In addition, acquired businesses may not achieve anticipated revenues, earnings or cash flows. Any shortfall in anticipated revenues, earnings or cash flows could require us to write down the carrying value of the intangible assets associated with any acquired company, which would adversely affect our reported earnings. For example, during the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded a $50.0 million impairment charge to write down the value of the goodwill associated with our investment in Bank Machine.

 

Since May 2001, we have acquired 14 ATM networks and one surcharge-free ATM network. Prior to our E*TRADE Access acquisition in June 2004, we had acquired only the assets of deployed ATM networks, rather than businesses and their related infrastructure. While we have not completed any significant acquisitions since our July 2007 acquisition of the financial services business of 7-Eleven, we expect to continue to evaluate selected acquisition opportunities that complement our existing network, some of which could be material. We currently anticipate that any such future acquisitions will likely reflect a mix of asset acquisitions and acquisitions of businesses, with each acquisition having its own set of unique characteristics. To the extent that we elect to acquire an existing company or the operations, technology, and personnel of another ATM provider, we may assume some or all of the liabilities associated with the acquired company and face new and added challenges integrating such acquisition into our operations.

 

Any inability on our part to effectively manage our past or future growth could limit our ability to successfully grow the revenue and profitability of our business.

 

Our international operations involve special risks and may not be successful, which would result in a reduction of our gross profits.

 

As of December 31, 2009, approximately 16% of our devices were located in the United Kingdom and Mexico. Those devices contributed 17.8% of our gross profits (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization) for the year ended December 31, 2009. We expect to continue to expand in the United Kingdom

and Mexico and potentially into other countries as opportunities arise. However, our international operations are subject to certain inherent risks, including:

 

 

Any of these factors could reduce the profitability and revenues derived from our international operations and international expansion. For example, during the latter half of 2008 and during 2009, we incurred reduced revenues as a consequence of the United States dollar strengthening relative to the British pound and Mexican peso. Additionally, the recent political and social instability in Mexico resulting from an increase in drug-related violence could negatively impact the level of transactions incurred on our existing devices in that market, as well as our ability to successfully grow our business there.

 

Our proposed expansion efforts into new international markets involve unique risks and may not be successful.

 

We plan to continue expanding our operations internationally with a focus on high growth emerging markets, such as those in Central and Eastern Europe, Central and South America, and the Asia-Pacific region. Because the off-premise ATM industry is relatively undeveloped in these emerging markets, we may not be successful in these expansion efforts. In particular, many of these markets do not currently employ or support an off-premise ATM surcharging model, meaning that we would have to rely on interchange fees as our primary source of revenues. While we have had some success in deploying non-surcharging ATMs in selected markets, such a model requires significant transaction volumes to make it economically feasible to purchase and deploy ATMs. Furthermore, most of the ATMs in these markets are owned and operated by financial institutions, thus increasing the risk that cardholders would be unwilling to utilize an off-premise ATM with an unfamiliar brand. Finally, the regulatory environments in many of these markets are evolving and unpredictable, thus increasing the risk that a particular deployment model chosen at inception may not be economically viable in the future.

 

In 2008, we recognized a goodwill impairment charge of $50.0 million. If we experience additional impairments of our goodwill or other intangible assets, we will be required to record an additional charge to earnings, which may be significant.

 

We have a large amount of goodwill and other intangible assets and are required to perform periodic assessments for any possible impairment for accounting purposes. As of December 31, 2009, we had goodwill and other intangible assets of $254.2 million, or 55.2% of our total assets. We periodically evaluate the recoverability and the amortization period of our intangible assets under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”). Some of the factors that we consider to be important in assessing whether or not impairment exists include the performance of the related assets relative to the expected historical or projected future operating results, significant changes in the manner of our use of the assets or the

strategy for our overall business, and significant negative industry or economic trends. These factors, assumptions, and any changes in them could result in an impairment of our goodwill and other intangible assets. In the event we determine our goodwill or amortizable intangible assets are impaired, we may be required to record a significant charge to earnings in our financial statements, which would negatively impact our results of operations and that impact could be material. For example, during the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded a $50.0 million goodwill impairment charge. Additionally, during each of the years ended December 2009 and 2008, we recorded $0.4 million in net impairment charges associated with intangibles related to our acquired merchant contracts/relationships. Other impairment charges in the future may also adversely affect our results of operations.

 

We have a substantial amount of indebtedness, which may adversely affect our cash flow and our ability to operate our business, remain in compliance with debt covenants, and make payments on our indebtedness.

 

As of December 31, 2009, we had outstanding indebtedness of approximately $307.3 million, which represents 100.4% of our total capitalization of $306.0 million. Our substantial indebtedness could have important consequences to you. For example, it could:

 

 

Any of these factors could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations. If we do not have sufficient earnings to service our debt, we may be required to refinance all or part of our existing debt, sell assets, borrow more money or sell securities, none of which we can guarantee we will be able to do.

 

The terms of our credit agreement and the indentures governing our senior subordinated notes may restrict our current and future operations, particularly our ability to respond to changes in our business or to take certain actions.

 

Our credit agreement and the indentures governing our senior subordinated notes include a number of covenants that, among other items, restrict or limit our ability to:

 

 

In addition, we are required by our credit agreement to maintain specified financial ratios and limit the amount of capital expenditures incurred in any given 12-month period. While we currently have the ability to borrow the full amount available under our credit agreement, as a result of these ratios and limits, we may be limited in the manner in which we conduct our business in the future and may be unable to engage in favorable business activities or finance our future operations or capital needs. Accordingly, these restrictions may limit our ability to successfully operate our business and prevent us from fulfilling our debt obligations. A failure to comply with the covenants or financial ratios could result in an event of default. In the event of a default under our credit agreement, the lenders could exercise a number of remedies, some of which could result in an event of default under the indentures governing the senior subordinated notes. An acceleration of indebtedness under our credit agreement would also likely result in an event of default under the terms of any other financing arrangement we have outstanding at the time. If any or all of our debt were to be accelerated, we cannot assure you that our assets would be sufficient to repay our indebtedness in full. If we are unable to repay any amounts outstanding under our bank credit facility when due, the lenders will have the right to proceed against the collateral securing our indebtedness. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Financing Facilities,” included elsewhere herein.

 

We incurred substantial losses in the past and may incur losses again in the future.

 

Although we generated a net profit of $5.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, we incurred net losses in the preceding four years. As of December 31, 2009, we had an accumulated deficit of $96.9 million. There can be no guarantee that we will continue to achieve profitability in the future. Even if we continue to be profitable, given the competitive and evolving nature of the industry in which we operate, we may not be able to sustain or increase such profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.

 

We operate in a changing and unpredictable regulatory environment. If we are subject to new legislation regarding the operation of our ATMs, we could be required to make substantial expenditures to comply with that legislation, which may reduce our net income and our profit margins.

 

With its initial roots in the banking industry, the United States ATM industry is regulated by the rules and regulations of the federal Electronic Funds Transfer Act, which establishes the rights, liabilities, and responsibilities of participants in EFT systems. The vast majority of states have few, if any, licensing requirements. However, legislation related to the United States ATM industry is periodically proposed at the state and local level. Additionally, the recent increase in surcharge fees by several large financial institutions has prompted certain members of the United States Congress to call for a reexamination of the interchange and surcharge fees that consumers are charged at an ATM. To date, no such legislation has been enacted that materially adversely affects our business. In the United Kingdom, the ATM industry is largely self-regulating. Most ATMs in the United Kingdom are part of the LINK network and must operate under the network rules set forth by LINK, including complying with rules regarding required signage and screen messages. Additionally, legislation is proposed from time-to-time at the national level, though nothing to date has been enacted that materially affects our business.

 

Finally, the ATM industry in Mexico has been historically operated by financial institutions. Banco de Mexico supervises and regulates ATM operations of both financial institutions and non-bank ATM deployers. Although, Banco de Mexico’s regulations permit surcharge fees to be charged in ATM transactions, it has not issued specific regulations for the provision of ATM services. In addition, in order for a non-bank ATM deployer to provide ATM services in Mexico, the deployer must be affiliated with PROSA-RED or E-Global, which are credit card and debit card proprietary networks that transmit information and settle ATM transactions between their participants. As only financial institutions are allowed to be participants of PROSA-RED or E-Global, Cardtronics Mexico entered into a joint venture with Bansi, who is a member of PROSA-RED. As a financial institution, Bansi and all entities in which it participates, including Cardtronics Mexico,

are regulated by the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit (“Secretaria de Hacienda y Crédito Público”) and supervised by the Banking and Securities Commission (“Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores”). Additionally, Cardtronics Mexico is subject to the provisions of the Ley del Banco de Mexico (Law of Banco de Mexico), the Ley de Instituciones de Crédito (Mexican Banking Law), and the Ley para la Transparencia y Ordenamiento de los Servicios Financieros (Law for the Transparency and Organization of Financial Services).

 

We will continue to monitor all such legislation and attempt, to the extent possible, to prevent the passage of such laws that we believe are needlessly burdensome or unnecessary. If regulatory legislation is passed in any of the jurisdictions in which we operate, we could be required to make substantial expenditures which would reduce our net income.

 

The passing of legislation banning or limiting surcharge fees would severely impact our revenues.

 

Despite the nationwide acceptance of surcharge fees at ATMs in the United States since their introduction in 1996, consumer activists have from time to time attempted to impose local bans or limits on surcharge fees. Even in the few instances where these efforts have passed the local governing body (such as with an ordinance adopted by the city of Santa Monica, California), federal courts have overturned these local laws on federal preemption grounds. However, those efforts may resurface and, should the federal courts abandon their adherence to the federal preemption doctrine, those efforts could receive more favorable consideration than in the past. Any successful legislation banning or limiting surcharge fees could result in a substantial loss of revenues and significantly curtail our ability to continue our operations as currently configured.

 

In the United Kingdom, the Treasury Select Committee of the House of Commons published a report regarding surcharges in the ATM industry in March 2005. This committee was formed to investigate public concerns regarding the ATM industry, including (1) adequacy of disclosure to ATM customers regarding surcharges, (2) whether ATM providers should be required to provide free services in low-income areas and (3) whether to limit the level of surcharges. While the committee made numerous recommendations to Parliament regarding the ATM industry, including that ATMs should be subject to the Banking Code (a voluntary code of practice adopted by all financial institutions in the United Kingdom), the United Kingdom government did not accept the committee’s recommendations. Despite the rejection of the committee’s recommendations, the United Kingdom government did sponsor an ATM task force to look at social exclusion in relation to ATM services. As a result of the task force’s findings, approximately 600 additional free-to-use ATMs (to be provided by multiple ATM providers) were required to be installed in low income areas throughout the United Kingdom While this is less than a 2% increase in free-to-use ATMs throughout the United Kingdom, there is no certainty that other similar proposals will not be made and accepted in the future. If the legislature or another body with regulatory authority in the United Kingdom were to impose limits on the level of surcharges for ATM transactions, our revenue from operations in the United Kingdom would be negatively impacted.

 

In Mexico, surcharging for off-premise ATMs was legalized in late 2003, but was not formally implemented until July 2005. As such, the charging of fees to consumers to utilize off-premise ATMs is a relatively new event in Mexico. Accordingly, it is too soon to predict whether public concerns over surcharging will surface in Mexico. However, if such concerns were to be raised, and if the applicable legislative or regulatory bodies in Mexico decided to impose limits on the level of surcharges for ATM transactions, our revenue from operations in Mexico would be negatively impacted. In October 2009, Banco de Mexico adopted new rules regarding how ATM operators disclose fees to consumers. The objective of these rules is to provide more transparency to the consumer regarding the cost of a specific ATM transaction, rather than to limit the amount of fees charged to the consumer. The effect of these rules will require ATM operators to elect between receiving interchange fees from card issuers or surcharge fees from consumers. As these new rules only require an ATM operator to disclose the total fees charge to a consumer, rather than limit the amount of fees that can be charged to a consumer, we do not anticipate that these new rules will have a material effect on Cardtronics Mexico’s operations. However, we cannot be sure that additional rulings that limit the amount of fees charged to the consumer or that may be earned on an individual ATM transaction will be not adopted in the future.

Potential new currency designs may require modifications to our ATMs that could severely impact our cash flows.

 

On November 26, 2006, a U.S. District Court judge ruled that the United States’ currencies (as currently designed) violate the Rehabilitation Act, a law that prohibits discrimination in government programs on the basis of disability, as the paper currencies issued by the United States are identical in size and color, regardless of denomination. As a consequence of this ruling, the United States Treasury conducted a study to determine the options to make United States paper currency accessible to the blind or visually impaired. It is our understanding that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (“BEP”) received that study on or about July 28, 2009, and together with the United States Treasury and the Federal Reserve, are reviewing the study. Upon the completion of that review, these institutions will publish their recommendations and thereafter seek public comments (in writing and at public forums) on those recommendations. Following the public comment period, a final recommendation will be made to the Secretary of the Treasury, who has authority to change the design and features of the currency notes utilized in the United States. While it is still uncertain at this time what impact, if any, this process will have on the ATM industry (including us), it is possible that any changes made to the design of the paper currency notes utilized in the United States could require us to incur additional costs, which could be substantial, to modify our ATMs in order to store and dispense such notes.

 

Noncompliance with established EFT network rules and regulations could expose us to fines and penalties and could negatively impact our results of operations. Additionally, new EFT network rules and regulations could require us to expend significant amounts of capital to remain in compliance with such rules and regulations.

 

Our transactions are routed over various EFT networks to obtain authorization for cash disbursements and to provide account balances. These networks include Star, Pulse, NYCE, Cirrus, and Plus in the United States; LINK in the United Kingdom; and PROSA-RED in Mexico. EFT networks set the interchange fees that they charge to the financial institutions, as well as the amounts paid to us. Additionally, EFT networks, including MasterCard and Visa, establish rules and regulations that ATM providers, including ourselves, must comply with in order for member cardholders to use those ATMs. Failure to comply with such rules and regulations could expose us to penalties and/or fines, which could negatively impact our financial results. For example, in the United Kingdom, MasterCard and Visa require compliance with the EMV security standard. This standard provides for the security and processing of information contained on microchips imbedded in certain debit and credit cards, known as “smart cards.” While we completed our compliance efforts in this regard in 2008, we incurred $1.2 million in charges earlier that year due to transactions conducted on our machines with counterfeit cards prior to the completion of our EMV certification efforts.

 

In addition to the above, new rules or regulations enacted by the EFT networks could require us to expend significant sums of capital to ensure that our ATMs and financial services kiosks remain in compliance with such rules and regulations. For example, we expended significant sums of capital in recent years to meet the Triple-DES security standards mandated by MasterCard and Visa. Similar rules and regulations that may be enacted in the future could result in us having to make additional capital outlays in order to remain in compliance, some of which could be significant.

 

The passing of anti-money laundering legislation could cause us to lose certain merchant accounts and reduce our revenues.

 

Recent concerns by the United States federal government regarding the use of ATMs to launder money could lead to the imposition of additional regulations on our sponsoring financial institutions and our merchant customers regarding the source of cash loaded into their ATMs. In particular, such regulations could result in the incurrence of additional costs by individual merchants who load their own cash, thereby making their ATMs less profitable. Accordingly, some individual merchants may decide to discontinue their ATM operations, thus reducing the number of merchant-owned accounts that we currently manage. If such a reduction were to occur, we would see a corresponding decrease in our revenues.

Our operating results have fluctuated historically and could continue to fluctuate in the future, which could affect our ability to maintain our current market position or expand.

 

Our operating results have fluctuated in the past and may continue to fluctuate in the future as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control, including the following:

 

 

Any of the foregoing factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Although we have experienced growth in revenues in recent quarters, this growth rate is not necessarily indicative of future operating results. A relatively large portion of our expenses are fixed in the short-term, particularly with respect to personnel expenses, depreciation and amortization expenses, and interest expense. Therefore, our results of operations are particularly sensitive to fluctuations in revenues. As such, comparisons to prior periods should not be relied upon as indications of our future performance.

 

Risks Related to the Offering

 

We do not intend to pay, and we are currently prohibited from paying, dividends on our common stock and, consequently, your only opportunity to achieve a return on your investment is if the price of our stock appreciates.

 

We do not plan to declare dividends on shares of our common stock in the foreseeable future. Additionally, we are currently prohibited from making any cash dividends pursuant to the terms of our credit facility. Consequently, your only opportunity to achieve a return on your investment in us will be if the market price of our common stock appreciates, which may not occur, and you sell your shares at a profit. There is no guarantee that the price of our common stock that will prevail in the market after this offering will ever exceed the price that you pay.

 

Future sales of our common stock in the public market could adversely affect the market price of our common stock price, and any additional capital raised by us through the sale of equity or convertible securities may dilute your ownership in us.

 

We may sell additional shares of common stock in subsequent public offerings. We may also issue additional shares of common stock or convertible securities. We cannot predict the size of future issuances of our common stock or the effect, if any, that future issuances and sales of shares of our common stock will have on the market price of our common stock. Additionally, a number of our stockholders, including the selling stockholders offering securities in this offering, will retain a significant amount of our common stock, even after giving effect to this offering. Our stockholders may freely sell all or some of their holdings in us, in one or more transactions. Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock by us or our stockholders (including shares issued in connection with an acquisition), or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock.

Your ability to influence corporate matters may be limited because a small number of stockholders beneficially own a substantial amount of our common stock.

 

CapStreet II, L.P. and CapStreet Parallel II, L.P. (together with The CapStreet Group LLC, “The CapStreet Group”) and TA Associates are our largest equity stockholders. Even after giving effect to this offering, assuming no exercise by the underwriters of their over-allotment option and assuming a public offering price at the midpoint of the range set forth on the cover of this prospectus supplement, affiliates of The CapStreet Group will beneficially own 6,041,074 shares, or 14.5%, of our common stock, and affiliates of TA Associates will beneficially own 8,556,886 shares, or 20.5%, of our common stock. As a result of their ownership interests, these investors will be in a position to exert significant influence over the outcome of matters requiring a stockholder vote, including the election of directors, the entering into of mergers, sales of substantially all of our assets and other extraordinary transactions, and amendments to our certificate of incorporation or bylaws. In addition, this concentration of ownership may have the effect of preventing, discouraging or referring a change of control, which could depress the market price of our common stock. See “Selling Stockholders.”

 

Certain of our directors may have conflicts of interest because they are affiliated with significant stockholders. The resolution of these conflicts of interest may not be in our or your best interests.

 

Following the closing of this offering, certain of our directors may have conflicts of interest because of their affiliation with significant stockholders. Fred R. Lummis is associated with The CapStreet Group and Michael A.R. Wilson is associated with TA Associates. This may create conflicts of interest because Mr. Lummis has responsibilities to The CapStreet Group and its owners and Mr. Wilson has responsibilities to TA Associates and its owners. Their duties to TheCapStreet Group and TA Associates may conflict with their duties as directors of our company regarding business dealings between these investor groups and us and other matters. The resolution of these conflicts may not always be in our or your best interests. For example, The CapStreet Group and TA Associates are in the business of making investments in companies and may from time to time acquire and hold interests in businesses that compete directly or indirectly with us. The CapStreet Group and TA Associates may also pursue acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to our business and, as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us. There is no formal mechanism among The CapStreet Group, TA Associates, and Cardtronics for handling potential conflicts of interest.

 

Anti-takeover provisions in our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation, our amended and restated bylaws, and Delaware law could discourage a change of control that our stockholders may favor, which could negatively affect our stock price.

 

Provisions in our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation, our second amended and restated bylaws, and applicable provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law may make it more difficult and expensive for a third party to acquire control of us even if a change of control would be beneficial to the interests of our stockholders. These provisions could discourage potential takeover attempts and could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Our third amended and restated certificate of incorporation, our second amended and restated bylaws, and the Delaware General Corporation Law will:

 

 

Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards may be subject to limitation and may result in increased future tax liabilities to us.

 

Generally, a change of more than 50% in the ownership of a corporation’s stock, by value, over a three-year period constitutes an ownership change for United States federal income tax purposes. An ownership change may limit a company’s ability to use its net operating loss carryforwards attributable to the period prior to such change. The number of shares of common stock sold in connection with this offering may be sufficient, taking into account prior or future shifts in our ownership over a three-year period, to cause us to undergo an ownership change. If an ownership change occurs, and if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change net operating loss carryforwards to offset United States federal taxable income may become subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax liabilities to us. In addition, although we currently have valuation allowances established against our net deferred tax assets, the carrying values of any tax assets related to our net operating loss carryforwards, to the extent recognized, could be significantly reduced.

 

All of the shares of common stock covered by this prospectus supplement are being sold by the selling stockholders named in this prospectus supplement. We will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of the shares of our common stock by the selling stockholders, including from any exercise by the underwriters of their over-allotment option. We will pay the expenses of this offering other than the underwriters’ discounts and commissions.

 

The following table sets forth our consolidated capitalization as of December 31, 2009. You should read this table in conjunction with our “Selected Historical Financial Data,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and our historical consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto included in our 2009 Form 10-K, filed with the SEC on March 4, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in this prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus. See “Where You Can Find More Information.”

 

 

As of March 15, 2010, we had 41,658,756 shares of common stock outstanding, held by approximately 100 holders of record. Our common stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol “CATM.” The following table reflects the high and low sales prices for our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Global Market for the periods indicated:

 

 

We have historically not paid, nor do we anticipate paying, dividends with respect to our common stock. Instead, we anticipate that all of our earnings in the foreseeable future will be used for the operation and growth of our business. Our ability to pay dividends to holders of our common stock is currently prohibited by the terms of our credit facility. For further information on restrictions regarding our ability to pay dividends, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Financing Facilities — Revolving Credit Facility,” “— Senior Subordinated Notes” and “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 11” to our 2009 Form 10-K. Any future determination to pay dividends on our common stock is subject to the discretion of our board of directors and will depend upon various factors, including our financial position, results of operations, liquidity requirements, restrictions that may be imposed by applicable law and our contracts, including our credit facility and the indentures governing our senior subordinated notes, and other factors deemed relevant by our board of directors.

 

As a result of our acquisition of the 7-Eleven Financial Services Business in July 2007 and Bank Machine in May 2005, our financial results for the years presented below are not comparable. As a result, the following selected historical consolidated financial and operating data should be read together with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and related notes to those statements from our 2009 Form 10-K, which is incorporated herein by reference. The selected consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2007, 2008, and 2009 and the selected consolidated statements of operations data for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements from our Annual Reports on Forms 10-K for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009. The balance sheet data as of December 31, 2005 and 2006, and the statements of operations data for the year ended December 31, 2005 have been derived from our consolidated financial statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, which is not included in or incorporated by reference in this prospectus. Historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected in the future.

 

 

 

 

 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contains forward-looking statements that are based on management’s current expectations, estimates, and projections about our business and operations. Our actual results may differ materially from those currently anticipated and expressed in such forward-looking statements as a result of numerous factors, including those we discuss under “Risk Factors,” which begin on page S-9 of this prospectus supplement. Additionally, you should read the following discussion together with the historical consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in our 2009 Form 10-K.

 

Our discussion and analysis includes the following:

 

 

Certain unaudited pro forma financial and operational information has been presented herein as if the Company’s acquisition of the financial service business of 7-Eleven, Inc. (the “7-Eleven Financial Services Business”), which was consummated in July 2007, occurred at the beginning of the year on January 1, 2007. This unaudited pro forma information is presented for illustrative purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of what our actual financial or operational results would have been had the acquisition (the “7-Eleven ATM Transaction”) been consummated on such date. This unaudited pro forma information should be read in conjunction with our historical consolidated financial statements and the related notes, included in our 2009 Form 10-K.

 

Economic and Strategic Outlook

 

Over the past several years, we made significant capital investments in our business, including (1) the acquisition of our United Kingdom operation in 2005, (2) our expansion into Mexico in 2006, (3) the launch of our EFT transaction processing platform in 2006, (4) our acquisition of the ATM and consumer financial services business of 7-Eleven in 2007, and (5) the launch of our armored courier operation in the United Kingdom in 2008. Additionally, during this same period of time, we continued to deploy ATMs in high-traffic locations under our contracts with large, well-known retailers, which has led to the development of relationships with large financial institutions through bank branding opportunities and enhanced the value of our wholly-owned surcharge-free network, Allpoint. As a result of these strategic actions and the relatively conservative use of capital during this time, the negative impact of the recent economic downturn on our business has been, and we expect will continue to be, mitigated by the following:

 

Stable and recurring nature of our business.  Our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2009 demonstrate that the significant capital investments made over the past several years have provided us with an operating platform that we believe should continue to generate relatively stable earnings and consistent cash flows. Based on our recent results, transactions conducted on our ATMs have not been negatively affected by the recent economic downturn and we currently expect that this trend will continue. For example, average monthly cash withdrawal transactions per ATM increased to 616 during 2009 from 579 in 2008. Furthermore, while we have seen declines in surcharge-related withdrawal transactions in the United States and the United

Kingdom, we have continued to see increases in overall withdrawal transaction levels (especially surcharge-free withdrawal transactions), which increased by approximately 7% from 2008 to 2009.

 

Strong liquidity position.  We believe that we have sufficient liquidity to meet our anticipated operating needs for the foreseeable future. Our $175.0 million revolving credit facility does not expire until May 2012 and is comprised of a syndicate of leading large financial institutions. As of December 31, 2009, we had no borrowings outstanding under this facility and $4.7 million in letters of credit posted under the facility, leaving us $170.3 million in available, committed funding. Our remaining indebtedness included $0.2 million of capital leases in the United States, $9.8 million of secured equipment loans in Mexico, and $300.0 million in senior subordinated notes. The fixed-rate notes, which mature in August 2013, contain no maintenance covenants and only limited incurrence covenants, which we continue to be in compliance with, and require only semi-annual interest payments prior to their maturity date.

 

Product diversification.  Over the past few years, we have consciously worked to diversify our product and service offerings beyond the traditional ATM surcharging model, which we believe will provide for future growth opportunities that we do not expect to require significant amounts of new capital. Examples of these growth opportunities include (1) providing managed services offerings to financial institutions and retailers with dispersed ATM and financial services kiosk networks; (2) adding more third parties to our EFT transaction processing platform, similar to the arrangement we currently have in place to process transactions for over 1,600 ATMs owned and operated by a third-party convenience store chain in the United States; (3) continued expansion and improvement in the types of services that we currently offer through our multi-function financial services kiosks located in 7-Eleven convenience stores across the United States; and (4) continued growth in our bank branding and surcharge-free offerings.

 

Overview of Business

 

As of December 31, 2009, we operated a network of over 33,400 ATMs, including approximately 2,200 financial services kiosks, throughout the United States (including Puerto Rico), the United Kingdom and Mexico. Our extensive network is strengthened by multi-year contractual relationships with a wide variety of nationally and internationally-known merchants pursuant to which we operate ATMs and financial services kiosks in their locations. We deploy our devices under two distinct arrangements with our merchant partners: Company-owned and merchant-owned arrangements.

 

Company-owned Arrangements.  Under a Company-owned arrangement, we own or lease the device and are responsible for controlling substantially all aspects of its operation. These responsibilities include what we refer to as first line maintenance, such as replacing paper, clearing paper or bill jams, resetting the device, any telecommunications and power issues, or other maintenance activities that do not require a trained service technician. We are also responsible for what we refer to as second line maintenance, which includes more complex maintenance procedures that require trained service technicians and often involve replacing component parts. In addition to first and second line maintenance, we are responsible for arranging for cash, cash loading, supplies, transaction processing, telecommunications service, and all other services required for the operation of the device, other than electricity. We typically pay a fee, either periodically, on a per-transaction basis or a combination of both, to the merchant on whose premises the device is physically located. We operate a limited number of our Company-owned devices on a merchant-assisted basis. In these arrangements, we own the device and provide all transaction processing services, but the merchant generally is responsible for providing and loading cash and performing first line maintenance.

 

Typically, we deploy our devices under Company-owned arrangements for our national and regional merchant customers. Our customers include 7-Eleven, Chevron, Costco, CVS, ExxonMobil, Hess, Rite Aid, Safeway, Target, Walgreens, and Winn-Dixie in the United States; Asda, Euro Garages Ltd., Forces Financial, IKEA, Martin McColl Ltd., Murco Petroleum Ltd., The Noble Organisation Ltd., Tates Ltd., and Welcome Break in the United Kingdom; and OXXO in Mexico. Because Company-owned locations are controlled by us (i.e., we control the on-line availability of the machines), are usually located in major national chains, and are thus more likely candidates for additional sources of revenue such as bank branding, they generally offer higher transaction volumes and greater profitability, which we consider necessary to justify the upfront capital

cost of installing such machines. As of December 31, 2009, we operated approximately 22,870 devices under Company-owned arrangements.

 

Merchant-owned Arrangements.  Under a merchant-owned arrangement, a merchant owns the device and is responsible for its first-line maintenance and the majority of the operating costs; however, we generally continue to provide all transaction processing services, second-line maintenance, 24-hour per day monitoring and customer service, and, in some cases, retain responsibility for providing and loading cash. We typically enter into merchant-owned arrangements with our smaller, independent merchant customers. In situations where a merchant purchases a device from us, the merchant normally retains responsibility for providing cash for the device. Because the merchant bears more of the operating costs under this arrangement, the merchant typically receives a higher fee on a per-transaction basis than is the case under a Company-owned arrangement. In merchant-owned arrangements under which we have assumed responsibility for providing and loading cash and/or second line maintenance, the merchant receives a smaller fee on a per-transaction basis than in the typical merchant-owned arrangement. As of December 31, 2009, we operated approximately 10,540 devices under merchant-owned arrangements.

 

In the future, we expect the percentage of our Company-owned and merchant-owned arrangements to continue to fluctuate in response to the mix of devices we add through internal growth and acquisitions. While we may continue to add merchant-owned devices to our network as a result of acquisitions and internal sales efforts, our focus for internal growth will remain on expanding the number of Company-owned locations in our network due to the higher margins typically earned and the additional revenue opportunities available to us under Company-owned arrangements.

 

Electronic Funds Transfer (“EFT”) Transaction Processing.  As of December 31, 2009, we had substantially completed the process of converting our devices from various third-party transaction processing companies to our own EFT transaction processing platform, with the exception of approximately 3,600 traditional ATMs placed in 7-Eleven stores that are in the process of being converted in 2010. We were historically unable to transition these ATMs over to our platform as we were under-contract with a third party to provide the transaction processing services for these machines through December 2009. Our EFT transaction processing capabilities provide us with the ability to control the processing of transactions conducted on our network and allow us to control the content of the information appearing on the screens of our devices, which increases the types of products and services that we are able to offer to financial institutions. For example, with the ability to control screen flow, we are able to offer customized branding solutions to financial institutions, including one-to-one marketing and advertising services at the point of transaction. Additionally, the transition of our devices to our own EFT transaction processing platform has provided us with operational cost savings in terms of lower overall processing costs.

 

As our EFT transaction processing efforts are focused on controlling the flow and content of information on the device screens, we typically rely on third party service providers to handle the generic back-end connections to the EFT networks and limited funds settlement and reconciliation processes for our Company-owned accounts.

 

Components of Revenues, Cost of Revenues, and Expenses

 

Revenues

 

We derive our revenues primarily from providing ATM and automated consumer financial services and, to a lesser extent, from branding arrangements, surcharge-free network offerings, and sales of ATM equipment. We currently classify revenues into two primary categories: ATM operating revenues and ATM product sales and other revenues.

 

ATM Operating Revenues.  We present revenues from ATM and automated consumer financial services, branding arrangements, and surcharge-free network offerings as “ATM operating revenues” in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. These revenues include the fees we earn per transaction on our network, fees we generate from bank branding arrangements and our surcharge-free network offerings, and fees earned from providing certain maintenance services. Our revenues from ATM services have increased rapidly in recent

years due to the acquisitions we have completed since 2001, as well as through internal expansion of our existing and acquired networks.

 

ATM operating revenues primarily consist of the three following components: (1) surcharge revenue, (2) interchange revenue, and (3) branding and surcharge-free network revenue.

 

 

Under the Allpoint network, which we acquired through our acquisition of ATM National, Inc. in December 2005, financial institutions who are members of the network pay us either a fixed monthly fee per cardholder or a set fee per transaction in exchange for us providing their cardholders with surcharge-free access to most of our domestic owned and/or operated ATMs. These fees are meant to compensate us for the loss of surcharge revenues. Although we forego surcharge revenues on those

transactions, we do continue to earn interchange revenues. We believe that many of these surcharge-free transactions represent withdrawal transactions from cardholders who have not previously utilized the underlying ATMs, and these increased transaction counts more than offset the foregone surcharge. Consequently, we believe that Allpoint enables us to profitably operate in that portion of the ATM transaction market that does not involve a surcharge. Allpoint also works with financial institutions that manage stored-value debit card programs on behalf of corporate entities and governmental agencies, including general purpose, payroll and electronic benefits transfer (“EBT”) cards. Under these programs, the issuing financial institutions pay Allpoint a fee per issued prepaid debit card in return for allowing the users of those cards surcharge-free access to Allpoint’s participating network.

 

In addition to Allpoint, the ATMs that we operate in 7-Eleven stores, as well as select other merchant locations, participate in the CO-OP network, the nation’s largest surcharge-free network devoted exclusively to credit unions. Additionally, the financial services kiosks located in 7-Eleven stores are under an arrangement with Financial Services Centers Cooperative, Inc. (“FSCC”), a cooperative service organization that provides shared branching services for credit unions, to provide virtual branching services through the machines for members of the FSCC network.

 

In addition to the above, we also earn ATM operating revenues from the provision of more sophisticated financial services transactions at over 2,200 financial services kiosks that, in addition to standard ATM services, offer bill payment, check cashing, remote deposit capture, and money transfer services.

 

The following table sets forth, on a historical and pro forma basis, information on our surcharge, interchange, branding and surcharge-free network fees, and other ATM operating revenues per cash withdrawal transaction for the periods indicated. The pro forma information presented below assumes the 7-Eleven ATM Transaction occurred effective January 1, 2007.

 

 

 

 

The decline in our ATM operating revenues per cash withdrawal transaction over the past three years, as reflected in the table above, is primarily attributable to our efforts to increase the percentage of surcharge-free cash withdrawal transactions conducted on our network of devices. Such efforts have resulted in a significant increase in the number of withdrawal transactions being conducted on our devices, and thus, a corresponding increase in the overall revenues earned per device. However, the revenues earned per surcharge-free transaction are typically lower than the per-transaction amounts earned from surcharge-bearing transactions, thus contributing to the per-transaction decline reflected in the table above. Additionally, our ATM operating revenues per cash withdrawal transaction were negatively impacted in 2009 when compared to 2008 due to the effects of foreign currency exchange rate movements.

While our ATM operating revenues per cash withdrawal transaction have declined in recent years, our ATM operating expenses per withdrawal transaction have shown similar, if not greater, declines during the same period. As a result, our overall profitability per ATM during this period has increased significantly, as reflected in the “Key Operating Metrics” discussion contained below.

 

The following table presents, on a historical and pro forma basis, the components of our total ATM operating revenues for the years indicated:

 

 

ATM Product Sales and Other Revenues.  We present revenues from the sale of ATMs and other non-transaction-based revenues as “ATM product sales and other revenues” in our Consolidated statements of Operations. These revenues consist primarily of sales of ATMs and related equipment to merchants operating under merchant-owned arrangements, as well as sales under our value-added reseller (“VAR”) program with NCR. Under our VAR program, we primarily sell ATMs to Associate VARs who in turn resell the ATMs to various financial institutions throughout the United States in territories authorized by the equipment manufacturer. While we expect to continue to derive a portion of our revenues from direct sales of ATMs in the future, we expect that this source of revenue will not comprise a substantial portion of our total revenues in future periods.

 

Cost of Revenues

 

Our cost of revenues primarily consists of those costs directly associated with transactions completed on our network of ATMs and financial services kiosks. These costs include merchant fees, vault cash rental expense, other cost of cash, repairs and maintenance expense, processing fees, communications expense, and direct operations expense. To a lesser extent, cost of revenues also includes those costs associated with the sales of ATMs. The following is a description of our primary cost categories:

 

Merchant Fees.  We pay our merchants a fee that depends on a variety of factors, including the type of arrangement under which the device is placed and the number of transactions on that device. For the year ended December 31, 2009, merchant fees represented 32.5% of our ATM operating revenues.

 

Vault Cash Rental Expense.  We pay a fee to our vault cash providers for renting the cash that is maintained in our devices. As the fees we pay under our contracts with our vault cash providers are based on market rates of interest, changes in interest rates affect our cost of cash. In order to limit our exposure to increases in interest rates, we have entered into a number of interest rate swaps on varying amounts of our current and anticipated outstanding cash balances in our domestic and United Kingdom operations through 2013. For the year ended December 31, 2009, vault cash rental expense represented 7.0% of our ATM operating revenues.

 

Other Cost of Cash.  Other cost of cash includes all costs associated with the provision of cash for our devices except for rental expense, including armored courier services, insurance, cash reconciliation, associated wire fees, and other costs. For the year ended December 31, 2009, other cost of cash represented 9.0% of our ATM operating revenues.

 

Repairs and Maintenance.  Depending on the type of arrangement with the merchant, we may be responsible for first and/or second line maintenance for the device. We typically use third parties with national operations to provide these services. Our primary maintenance vendors are Diebold, NCR, and Pendum. For the year ended December 31, 2009, repairs and maintenance expense represented 8.0% of our ATM operating revenues.

Processing Fees.  For processing transactions originating on our devices that have not yet been transitioned to our EFT transaction processing platform, we continue to pay fees to third-party vendors. These vendors, which include Elan Financial Services and Fidelity Information Services in the United States, LINK in the United Kingdom, and PROSA-RED in Mexico, communicate with the cardholder’s financial institution through EFT networks to gain transaction authorization and to settle transactions. As we have converted most of our domestic devices over to our EFT transaction processing platform except for approximately 3,600 traditional ATMs in 7-Eleven stores that are currently in the process of being converted, we expect to see a slight reduction in our overall processing costs on a go-forward basis.

 

Communications.  Under our Company-owned arrangements, we are responsible for expenses associated with providing telecommunications capabilities to the devices, allowing them to connect with the applicable EFT network.

 

Other Expenses.  Other expenses primarily consists of direct operations expenses, which are costs associated with managing our network, including expenses for monitoring the devices, program managers, technicians, and customer service representatives.

 

Cost of ATM Product Sales.  In connection with the sale of equipment to merchants and value-added resellers, we incur costs associated with purchasing equipment from manufacturers, as well as delivery and installation expenses.

 

We define variable costs as those incurred on a per transaction basis. Processing fees and the majority of merchant fees fall under this category. Processing fees and merchant fees accounted for 48.9% of our cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization related to ATMs and ATM-related assets) for the year ended December 31, 2009. Therefore, we estimate that 51.1% of our cost of ATM operating revenues is generally fixed in nature, meaning that any significant decrease in transaction volumes would lead to a decrease in the profitability of our operations, unless there was an offsetting increase in per-transaction revenues or decrease in our fixed costs. Conversely, as a majority of our operating costs are fixed in nature, a significant increase in transaction volumes would lead to an increase in the profitability of our operations. We currently exclude depreciation, accretion, and amortization from ATMs and ATM-related assets from our cost of ATM revenues. However, the inclusion of such costs would have increased the percentage of our cost of ATM operating revenues that we consider fixed in nature by approximately 6.5% for the year ended December 31, 2009.

 

The profitability of any particular location, and of our entire ATM and financial services kiosk operation, is driven by a combination of surcharge, interchange, and branding and surcharge-free network revenues, as well as the level of our related costs. Accordingly, material changes in our average surcharge fee or average interchange fee may be offset by branding revenues, surcharge-free network fees, or other ancillary revenues, or by changes in our cost structure. Because a variance in our average surcharge fee or our average interchange fee is not necessarily indicative of a commensurate change in our profitability, you should consider these measures only in the context of our overall financial results.

 

Indirect Operating Expenses

 

Our indirect operating expenses include general and administrative expenses related to administration, salaries, benefits, advertising and marketing, depreciation and accretion of the ATMs, ATM-related assets, and other assets that we own, amortization of our acquired merchant contracts and other amortizable intangible assets, and interest expense related to borrowings under our revolving credit facility, our senior subordinated notes, and our equipment financing facilities. We depreciate our capital equipment on a straight-line basis over the estimated life of such equipment and amortize the value of acquired intangible assets over the estimated lives of such assets.

 

Developing Trends in the ATM and Financial Services Industry

 

Increase in Surcharge-Free Offerings.  Many United States banks serving the market for consumer banking services are aggressively competing for market share, and part of their competitive strategy is to

increase their number of customer touch points, including the establishment of an ATM network to provide convenient, surcharge-free access to cash for their customers. While a large owned-ATM network would be a key strategic asset for a bank, we believe it would be uneconomical for all but the largest banks to build and operate an extensive ATM network. Bank branding of ATMs and participation in surcharge-free networks allows financial institutions to rapidly increase surcharge-free ATM access for their customers at substantially less cost than building their own ATM networks. These factors have led to an increase in bank branding and participation in surcharge-free networks, and we believe that there will be continued growth in such arrangements.

 

Increase in Prepaid Debit Cards.  In the United States, we have seen a proliferation in the issuance and acceptance of prepaid debit cards as a means for consumers to access their cash and make routine retail purchases. Based on estimates published by Mercator Advisory Group, the number of prepaid debit cards among open loop network-branded money and financial services cards, payroll cards, social security cards, and unemployment benefit cards, is expected to increase from approximately 26.8 million cards in 2008 to 90.3 million cards in 2012. These numbers do not include card types less likely to be used at ATMs such as gift cards, consumer incentive cards, and transit cards.

 

We believe that our network of ATMs and financial services kiosks, located in well-known retail establishments throughout the United States, provides a convenient and cost-effective way for holders of such cards to access their cash and potentially conduct other financial services transactions. Furthermore, through Allpoint, which partners with financial institutions that issue and sponsor prepaid debit card programs on behalf of corporate entities and governmental organizations, we are able to provide holders of such cards convenient, surcharge-free access to their cash. While it is difficult to measure the precise number of cash withdrawal transactions occurring from prepaid debit cards on our network, we believe that such number increased significantly during 2009 and represented a significant portion of the year-over-year withdrawal transaction count gains that we saw in the United States.

 

In response to the recent proliferation in the issuance and acceptance of prepaid debit cards, as well as perceived abuses within the credit and debit card industries in general, the United States Congress recently passed the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (the “Credit Card Act”). With respect to prepaid debit cards (in particular, gift certificates, store gift cards and general-use prepaid cards), the Credit Card Act imposes certain restrictions on card expiration dates and fees that can be charged to users of those cards. Additionally, the Credit Card Act mandates certain additional consumer disclosure requirements by issuers of these types of prepaid debit cards. The Credit Card Act does not apply to other types of prepaid debit cards, including reloadable prepaid cards that are not marketed or labeled as a gift card or gift certificate.

 

As a result of these new requirements, the Federal Reserve Board recently issued amendments to Regulation E, which are expected to become effective beginning in August 2010. Moreover, some state attorneys general have indicated a desire to implement specific state-by-state regulations on the emerging prepaid debit card industry. At this point, it is unclear whether the increase in the use of prepaid debit cards on our network will be negatively impacted by these recent regulatory actions and trends.

 

Growth in Other Automated Consumer Financial Services.  Approximately 75% of all ATM transactions in the United States are cash withdrawals, with the remainder representing other basic banking functions such as balance inquiries, transfers, and deposits. We believe that there are significant opportunities for a large non-bank ATM operator to provide additional financial services to customers, such as check cashing, remote deposit capture, money transfer, bill payment services, and prepaid debit card reload services through self-service kiosks. These additional consumer financial services would result in additional revenue streams for us and could ultimately result in increased profitability.

 

Managed Services.  While many banks own significant networks of ATMs that serve as extensions of their branch networks and increase the level of service offered to their customers, large ATM networks are costly to operate and typically do not provide significant revenue for banks and smaller financial institutions. As operating a network of ATMs is not a core competency for banks or other financial institutions, we believe there is an opportunity for a large non-bank ATM and financial services kiosk operator such as ourselves, with

lower costs and an established operating history, to contract with financial institutions to manage their ATM networks. Such an outsourcing arrangement could reduce a financial institution’s operational costs while extending their customer service. Additionally, we believe there are opportunities to provide selected services on an outsourced basis, such as transaction processing services, to other independent owners and operators of ATMs and financial services kiosks.

 

Growth in International Markets.  In most regions of the world, ATMs are less common than in the United States. We believe the ATM industry will grow faster in international markets than in the United States, as the number of ATMs per capita in those markets increases and begins to approach the levels seen here. In addition, there has been a trend towards growth of off-premise ATMs in several international markets, including the United Kingdom and Mexico.

 

 

Increases in Surcharge Rates.  In 2007 and 2008, several large financial institutions in the United States began increasing the surcharge rate charged to non-customers for the use of their ATMs. This increase in fees could potentially increase the amount of transactions conducted on our ATMs, as customers seek to minimize the amount of transaction fees paid by using ATMs that charge lower rates (such as ours). Alternatively, this increase by other institutions could provide us with the opportunity to increase the surcharge rates charged on our ATMs in selected markets and make our surcharge-free offerings more attractive to consumers and other financial institutions.

 

Recent Events

 

Cash Withdrawal Transaction Trends.  For the year ended December 31, 2009, total cash withdrawal transactions per ATM per month conducted on our domestic ATMs increased 4% over the prior year. This increase was due to a 28% increase in the number of surcharge-free cash withdrawal transactions, which was primarily attributable to two factors: 1) the mix shift in transactions (and the related revenues) that has occurred due to the continuing evolution of our product offerings away from the traditional surcharge-based model to a surcharge-free model, and 2) the proliferation in the use of network-branded prepaid debit cards by employers and governmental agencies for payroll and other benefit-related payments. Specifically, the increase in the number of prepaid debit cards in circulation has served to increase our potential customer base, as these

prepaid debit cards are capable of being used in ATMs, and many of the individuals to whom the cards are being issued are traditionally unbanked and have not historically been able to utilize ATMs. We expect to see a continued increase in the number of prepaid debit cards in the future, which we believe will result in an increase in the number of cash withdrawal transactions conducted on our ATMs. Additionally, although our surcharge-free offerings contributed to a 12% decline in the number of surcharge transactions conducted on our machines in 2009 versus 2008, our bank branding and surcharge-free network revenues, along with higher interchange revenues from the increased number of transactions being conducted on our ATMs, more than offset the decline in surcharge revenues.

 

In the United Kingdom, total cash withdrawal transactions per ATM per month increased by approximately 17% in 2009 when compared to 2008, due to a 44% increase in the number of free-to-use cash withdrawal transactions and a 4% increase in the number of pay-to-use cash withdrawal transactions conducted on our ATMs in that market. Despite the overall increase in pay-to-use withdrawals, the actual number of pay-to-use withdrawals per ATM per month declined during the period. We believe this decline is primarily the result of regulatory changes, including requirements to place more prominent fee notifications on pay-to-use ATMs, which has appeared to have caused a shift in consumer behavior. We believe this trend will continue in the future, and therefore have recently been installing more free-to-use machines in this market. Specifically, of the additional machines that we installed in the United Kingdom during 2009, approximately 90% were free-to-use as opposed to pay-to-use. Although we earn less revenue per cash withdrawal transaction on a free-to-use machine, the increase in the number of transactions conducted on free-to-use machines has translated to higher interchange revenues, which has more than offset the loss of surcharge revenues. For example, our per-ATM operating revenues per month totaled £1,487 during the year ended December 31, 2009, which represents an increase of approximately 8% when compared to the £1,377 earned per ATM per month during the previous year. As previously noted, we expect that this trend toward free-to-use ATMs will continue and we anticipate installing additional free-to-use ATMs in this market in the future.

 

Foreign Currency Exchange Rates.  The strengthening of the United States dollar relative to the British pound and Mexican peso negatively impacted our results during 2009 and 2008 in terms of translating those foreign earnings into United States dollars. Despite the negative impact on our revenues and gross profits, this trend did not have a significant negative impact on our cash flows, as we do not currently rely on cash generated by our international operations to fund our domestic operating needs and each operation conducts substantially all of its business in its local currency. Additionally, we continue to explore potential growth opportunities in the two international markets in which we currently operate, and the strengthening of the United States dollar could enhance our ability to invest in those markets at favorable exchange rates.

 

Revolving Credit Facility Modification.  In February 2009, we amended our revolving credit facility to (i) authorize our repurchase of common stock up to an aggregate of $10.0 million (further discussed below); (ii) increase the amount of aggregate “Investments” (as defined in the credit facility agreement) that we may make in non wholly-owned subsidiaries from $10.0 million to $20.0 million and correspondingly increase the aggregate amount of Investments that we may make in subsidiaries that are not Loan Parties (as defined in the credit facility agreement) from $25.0 million to $35.0 million; (iii) increase the maximum amount of letters of credit that may be issued under the facility from $10.0 million to $15.0 million; and (iv) modify the amount of capital expenditures that may be incurred on a rolling 12-month basis, as measured on a quarterly basis.

 

Stock Repurchase Program.  In February 2009, our Board of Directors approved a common stock repurchase program up to an aggregate of $10.0 million. To date, we have purchased approximately 35,000 shares of our common stock at a total cost of $0.1 million and at an average price per share of $3.37, which were repurchased on various dates in the open market. The share repurchase program had an initial expiration date of March 31, 2010. However, in March 2010, our Board of Directors extended the program through March 31, 2011, unless further extended or terminated earlier by our Board of Directors.

 

Expansion into Puerto Rico.  During the third quarter of 2009, we entered into the Puerto Rican ATM market. As of December 31, 2009, we had installed 21 ATMs in that market and we plan to continue to explore other growth opportunities on the island, as well as entrance into other Caribbean, Latin, and Central American ATM markets.

Mount Vernon Money Center.  In February 2010, MVMC, one of our third-party armored service providers in the Northeast, ceased all cash replenishment operations for its customers following the arrest on charges of bank fraud of its founder and principal owner. A few days later, the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York (the “Court”) appointed a receiver (the “Receiver”) to, among other things, seize all of the assets in the possession of MVMC. While we currently do not believe that this event will have a material adverse affect on our operations, we were required to convert over 1,000 ATMs that were being serviced by MVMC to another third-party armored service provider, resulting in a minor amount of downtime being experienced by those ATMs. Further, based upon the Receiver’s report dated March 1, 2010, and filed with the Court on that same date, it appears that some of the vault cash that was delivered to MVMC on our behalf was either commingled with vault cash belonging to MVMC’s other customers or was misappropriated by MVMC. Regardless, we currently believe that our existing insurance policies will cover any cash losses that we may incur resulting from this incident, less any deductible payments required to be paid by us under such policies. If it is ultimately determined that we have suffered cash losses in connection with this incident, the timing of recognition of such losses and the related insurance reimbursement amounts may not coincide.

 

Factors Impacting Comparability

 

7-Eleven ATM Transaction.  In July 2007, we acquired the 7-Eleven Financial Services Business for approximately $137.3 million in cash. The acquisition included approximately 5,500 ATMs located in 7-Eleven stores throughout the United States. Additionally, in connection with the 7-Eleven ATM Transaction, we entered into a placement agreement that provides us with, subject to certain conditions, a 10-year exclusive right to operate all ATMs in 7-Eleven locations throughout the United States, including any new stores opened or acquired by 7-Eleven.

 

The operating results of our United States segment include the results of the 7-Eleven Financial Services Business. Because of the significance of this acquisition, our operating results for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 are not comparable to our historical results for the year ended December 31, 2007. In particular, our revenues and gross profits for 2009 and 2008 were substantially higher, but the increased revenue and gross profit amounts were initially substantially offset by higher operating expense amounts, including higher selling, general, and administrative expenses associated with running the combined operations. In addition, depreciation, accretion, and amortization expense amounts were significantly higher as a result of the tangible and intangible assets recorded as part of the acquisition. For more information on the 7-Eleven ATM Transaction, see “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 3” to our 2009 Form 10-K.

 

Foreign Currency Exchange Rates.  As noted above, our results during 2009 and 2008 were negatively impacted by changes in foreign currency rates. As a result, we have provided certain information on a constant-currency basis in the following sections in an effort to allow for more meaningful comparisons to be made between the years presented.

Results of Operations

 

The following table sets forth our statement of operations information as a percentage of total revenues for the years indicated. Percentages may not add due to rounding.

 

 

 

 

 

Key Operating Metrics

 

We rely on certain key measures to gauge our operating performance, including total transactions, total cash withdrawal transactions, ATM operating revenues per ATM per month, and ATM operating gross profit margin. The following table sets forth information regarding certain of these key measures for the years indicated.

 

 

 

Revenues

 

 

Year ended December 31, 2009 compared to year ended December 31, 2008

 

ATM operating revenues.  ATM operating revenues generated during the year ended December 31, 2009 increased $7.3 million over the year ended December 31, 2008. Below is a detail, by segment, of changes in the various components of ATM operating revenues:

 

 

United States.  During the year ended December 31, 2009, our United States operations experienced a $2.5 million increase in ATM operating revenues over 2008. This increase was primarily due to a 16% increase in bank branding and surcharge-free network revenues that resulted from the continued growth of participating banks in our surcharge-free offerings. Additionally, increased participation in these programs and growth in the use of prepaid debit cards contributed to the 2% increase in the number of cash withdrawal transactions conducted on our ATMs, which resulted in a 3% increase in interchange revenues. Offsetting the increase in bank branding and surcharge-free network revenues and interchange revenues during the period was a 12% decline in the number of surcharge transactions, which resulted in an $11.6 million decline in surcharge revenue. Since our surcharge-free programs allow participants’ cardholders to make cash withdrawals on a surcharge-free basis at our ATMs, a decline in the number of surcharge transactions was expected. Also contributing to the decrease in surcharge transactions was a 6% decline in our merchant-owned account base, which contributed $4.8 million of the $11.6 million surcharge revenue decline but had a minimal impact on our overall gross profit as much of the surcharge revenues generated by those accounts are paid to the underlying merchants. Accordingly, as surcharge revenues declined, so did the related merchant payments.

 

United Kingdom.  During the year ended December 31, 2009, ATM operating revenues from our United Kingdom operations decreased $0.9 million from the year ended December 31, 2008, due to the unfavorable foreign currency exchange rate movements between the years. Specifically, during 2009, the average exchange rate between the United States dollar and the British pound was $1.57 to £1.00 compared to $1.85 to £1.00 in 2008. Excluding the impact of foreign currency movements, surcharge revenues and interchange revenues increased by $3.6 million (7%) and $8.6 million (39%), respectively. These increases were primarily driven by a 26% increase in cash withdrawal transactions that resulted from an 8% increase in the average number of transacting ATMs, which increased from 2,421 during 2008 to 2,606 ATMs during 2009. Additionally, the higher number of cash withdrawal transactions on our free-to-use ATMs also contributed to the increase in the amount of interchange revenues earned during 2009 on a constant currency basis.

 

Mexico.  Our Mexico operations experienced the most significant percentage increase in ATM operating revenues during the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily as a result of a 26% increase in the average

number of transacting ATMs associated with these operations. Specifically, the average number of transacting ATMs increased from 1,747 during 2008 to 2,197 during 2009, with an ending machine count of 2,616 as of December 31, 2009. This increased machine count contributed to the increase in total surcharge transactions of approximately 30%, which resulted in an additional $4.7 million and $0.3 million in surcharge and interchange revenues, respectively. Excluding the impact of unfavorable foreign currency exchange rate movements, the increases in surcharge and interchange revenues would have been $7.3 million and $1.3 million, respectively.

 

ATM product sales and other revenues.  ATM product sales and other revenues for the year ended December 31, 2009 were lower than those generated during 2008 by $7.0 million primarily due to lower equipment sales and lower VAR program sales. Under our VAR program, we primarily sell ATMs to Associate VARs who in turn resell the ATMs to various financial institutions throughout the United States in territories authorized by the equipment manufacturer. In the current economic climate, financial institutions and others have reduced their ATM purchases and we have, therefore, seen a decline in these sales during 2009. Also contributing to the decline was the completion of our Triple Data Encryption Standard (“Triple-DES”) upgrades in 2008, which generated a higher amount of product sales and service-related revenues during 2008.

 

Year ended December 31, 2008 compared to year ended December 31, 2007

 

ATM operating revenues.  ATM operating revenues generated during the year ended December 31, 2008 increased $110.5 million over the year ended December 31, 2007. Below is a detail, by segment, of changes in the various components of ATM operating revenues:

 

 

United States.  During the year ended December 31, 2008, our United States operations experienced a $92.1 million (30.9%) increase in ATM operating revenues over 2007. The majority of this increase was attributable to the 7-Eleven ATM Transaction. Specifically, our 2008 results included $41.8 million of incremental surcharge revenue, $29.7 million of incremental interchange revenue, $7.6 million of incremental branding and surcharge-free network revenue, and $4.0 million of advanced-functionality revenue generated by the acquired operations as a result of the inclusion of these operations in our results for the full year of 2008. Also contributing to the increase in ATM operating revenues were the additional branding and surcharge-free network agreements entered into during 2007, which resulted in $14.8 million in incremental bank branding and surcharge-free network fees from our pre-existing domestic operations. Finally, we also generated $4.5 million of incremental interchange revenues from our pre-existing Company-owned domestic operations in 2008 when compared to 2007, the majority of which can be attributed to the additional bank branding and surcharge-free network agreements entered into in 2007 as well as the higher number of Company-owned ATMs in 2008 compared to 2007.

 

The overall increase in ATM operating revenues described above was partially offset by lower surcharge and interchange revenues associated with our domestic merchant-owned operations. As a result of declines in the average number of transacting ATMs, surcharge revenues and interchange revenues generated by our merchant-owned base were $8.0 million and $1.9 million lower, respectively, during 2008 when compared to 2007. These declines were primarily a result of the decline in the average number of transacting merchant-owned ATMs in the United States, the majority of which was attributable to attrition related to the Triple-DES upgrades mandated by the EFT networks. Specifically, rather than incurring the costs to update or replace their existing machines to be Triple-DES compliant, merchants with lower transacting ATMs decided to dispose of their ATMs. Additionally, surcharge revenues from our Company-owned base declined by $0.5 million during

2008, primarily as a result of a shift in revenues from surcharge-based fees to surcharge-free branding and network fees due to the additional branding and surcharge-free network arrangements entered into with financial institutions during 2007.

 

United Kingdom.  Our United Kingdom operations further contributed to the higher ATM operating revenues during the year ended December 31, 2008, as surcharge revenues and interchange revenues increased by 4.6% and 61.4%, respectively, over 2007 due to the additional ATM deployments that occurred during 2007 and 2008. Specifically, the average number of transacting ATMs in the United Kingdom increased from 1,718 ATMs during 2007 to 2,421 ATMs during 2008. Additionally, a higher number of free-to-use ATMs also contributed to the increase in the amount of interchange revenues earned during 2008. However, the increase in revenues was lower than originally anticipated due to lower than expected surcharge transaction levels during 2008, which we believe were due to a number of factors, including (i) certain service-related issues associated with one of our third-party armored cash providers that resulted in a higher percentage of downtime at our ATMs during 2008, (ii) the overall economic downturn experienced in the United Kingdom, (iii) the installation of a significant number of new free-to-use ATMs in that market in 2008, and (iv) additional regulatory changes, including requirements to place more prominent fee notifications on pay-to-use ATMs.

 

In addition to the above factors that negatively impacted our surcharge transaction levels, and therefore our surcharge revenues, the strengthening of the United States dollar relative to the British pound also negatively impacted the revenues from our United Kingdom operations. Specifically, during 2008, the average exchange rate between the United States dollar and the British pound was $1.85 to £1.00 compared to $2.00 to £1.00 in 2007.

 

Mexico.  Our Mexico operations contributed to the increase in ATM operating revenues during the year ended December 31, 2008 as a result of the deployment of additional ATMs during 2007 and 2008. Specifically, the average number of transacting ATMs associated with these operations increased from 784 during 2007 to 1,747 during 2008.

 

ATM product sales and other revenues.  ATM product sales and other revenues for the year ended December 31, 2008 were slightly higher than those generated during 2007 primarily due to higher VAR program sales, which resulted from the additions of two new Associate VARs during the latter half of 2007 and one new Associate VAR in the first quarter of 2008.

 

Cost of Revenues

 

 

Year ended December 31, 2009 compared to year ended December 31, 2008

 

Cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization).  The cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization) incurred during the year ended December 31, 2009 decreased $29.0 million from the year ended December 31, 2008. Below is a detail,

by segment, of changes in the various components of the cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization):

 

 

United States.  During the year ended December 31, 2009, the cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization) incurred by our United States operations decreased $18.6 million from the costs incurred during 2008. This decrease was primarily due to lower merchant fees, which resulted from the 6% decline in the number of our merchant-owned accounts that resulted in an overall decline in surcharge transactions and the related surcharge revenues, as noted above. Also contributing to the decline in the cost of ATM operating revenues was lower vault cash rental expense, primarily due to reduced market interest rates on the unhedged portion of our vault cash rental obligations, and a decrease in other cost of cash, which was attributable to lower armored costs resulting from fewer cash fills and the effect of better pricing terms under the renegotiated contract with one of our primary armored service providers. Similarly, our primary domestic maintenance service agreement was renewed on favorable terms earlier in the year, which resulted in a lower repairs and maintenance expense for 2009 compared to the prior year. Our communications expense also declined, primarily as a result of the renegotiated contract with our telecommunications provider. Finally, we incurred lower transaction processing costs due to the continued conversion of the ATMs in our portfolio over to our EFT transaction processing platform.

 

With respect to our domestic vault cash rental obligations, we negotiated new pricing terms and conditions with one of our vault cash providers, which became effective in August 2009. Additionally, we are currently negotiating new pricing terms and conditions with another vault cash provider in the United States, which we expect will become effective July 1, 2010. As a result of these negotiations, we expect to see a slight increase in our vault cash rental costs in future periods, thus negatively impacting our domestic ATM operating gross profit margins. See “— Gross Profit Margin” below for a discussion of our expectations regarding gross margin levels for 2010.

 

United Kingdom.  During 2009, our United Kingdom operations also contributed to the decrease in the cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization). The overall $13.1 million decrease was primarily due to foreign currency exchange rate movements between periods. Excluding the impact of exchange rate movements, our United Kingdom operations’ cost of ATM operating revenues decreased by $3.8 million, despite an increase in the average number of transacting ATMs in 2009 when compared to 2008. The decrease in costs (excluding exchange rate movements) was primarily due to lower vault cash rental expense as a result of reduced market interest rates on our vault cash rental obligations in 2009 when compared to 2008. Additionally, we maintained higher cash balances in our ATMs within the United Kingdom during the latter half of 2008 in an effort to minimize the amount of downtime caused by service-related issues with a third-party armored service provider, which further contributed to the year-over-year decline in vault cash rental expense. Finally, our communications expense also declined as a result of the renegotiated contract with our primary communications provider in the United Kingdom.

With respect to our United Kingdom vault cash rental obligations, we renegotiated new pricing terms and conditions during 2009 with our existing vault cash provider in that market. The revised pricing terms and conditions are somewhat less favorable to us than those that were in effect under the previous agreement. As a result, the vault cash rental costs associated with our operations in the United Kingdom are expected to increase in future periods, thus negatively impacting our ATM operating gross profit margins in that segment. Additionally, during 2009, we entered into certain interest rate swap transactions to fix the interest rate utilized in calculating the monthly vault cash rental fees under our vault cash rental agreement in the United Kingdom. Such fixed rates, which became effective in January 2010, are higher than current market interest rates as the fixed rates under the swap contracts represent intermediate-term rates (which are typically higher) while the current market rates are short-term floating rates (which are typically lower). Accordingly, the amount we pay for our vault cash rental fees in the United Kingdom is expected to increase from current levels beginning in 2010, regardless of any changes that may occur with respect to market interest rates. See “— Gross Profit Margin” below for a discussion of our expectations regarding gross margin levels for 2010.

 

Mexico.  Partially offsetting the decrease in the cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization) of our United States and United Kingdom operations were the costs incurred by our Mexico operations. The higher costs in Mexico were attributable to a 26% increase in the average number of transacting ATMs and a 30% increase in the total number of transactions conducted on these machines during 2009 when compared to 2008, which resulted in a $2.7 million increase in the cost of ATM operating revenues for the year ended December 31, 2009, when compared to 2008. Excluding the impact of exchange rate movements (which were advantageous to the costs associated with these operations), the increase in our cost of ATM operating revenues for Mexico for year ended December 31, 2009 were $5.5 million higher than the same period last year.

 

Cost of ATM product sales and other revenue.  Relatively consistent with the 40.7% decrease in ATM product sales and other revenues discussed above, the cost of ATM product sales and other revenues decreased 32.4% during 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to lower equipment and VAR program sales during the period.

 

Year ended December 31, 2008 compared to year ended December 31, 2007

 

Cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization).  The cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization) incurred during the year ended December 31, 2008 increased $81.2 million over the year ended December 31, 2007. Below is a detail, by segment, of changes in the various components of the cost of ATM operating revenues (exclusive of depreciation, accretion, and amortization):