🌎 New Chapter 11 Filing - Lakeland Tours LLC (d/b/a WorldStrides) 🌎

in

Virginia-based Lakeland Tours LLC (d/b/a WorldStrides) and 22 affiliates (the “debtors”) filed for bankruptcy in the Southern District of New York, the latest in a relatively small group of COVID-related victims to end up in bankruptcy court. Similar to other pure-play filings (e.g., several Latin American airlines and Hertz Corporation $HTZ)), the debtors are in the travel industry; they are a provider of educational travel experiences in the US and abroad; they are the US’ largest accredited travel program serving hundreds of thousands of students and hundreds of universities annually. And they were doing well before the pandemic: in fiscal ‘19, the company generated approximately $650mm in net revenue and management projected $840mm in net revenue in ‘20. As we all know, “experiences” are all the rage these days and international student travel is far more common today than it was even five years ago (PETITION Note: seriously, folks, the company doesn’t even try to hide the social element to this … the above photo just screams “Pay us for an experience racked with non-stop selfies!). According to StudentUniverse and Skift, “[t]he student traveler represents fully one-fifth of all international arrivals in the travel industry, today. They command a market value of some $320 billion….”

A worldwide travel shutdown will obviously negatively impact that trend. And, by extension, obliterate the company’s projections. Indeed, the debtors were “decimated” by the worldwide shutdown of nonessential travel. Revenue? Lost. Future bookings? Crushed. Refund requests? Voluminous. The “negative net bookings” must have been off the charts. All in, these factors created a $200mm liquidity hole for the debtors.

This need for new capital, when coupled with the debtors’ burdensome capital structure ($768mm of funded debt), precipitated the need for a restructuring. And, alas, the debtors have a restructuring support agreement (the “RSA”) agreed to by the debtors’ prepetition secured lenders, their hedge provider and their equity sponsors, Eurazeo North America and Primavera Capital Limited. The RSA commits these consenting stakeholders to, among other things, a $200mm new capital infusion (exclusive of fees) split 50/50 between the consenting lenders and the sponsors which will roll into exit debt and equity.* Here are the highlights:

  • The $100mm provided by the lenders will roll into an exit facility;

  • The $150mm roll-up will roll into a second-out term loan take-back facility; and

  • The $100mm provided by the equity sponsors will convert into 100% of the common stock of the reorganized debtors (subject to dilution from a management incentive plan).

  • Holders of $126mm in subordinated seller notes will get wiped out along with existing equity interests.

  • General unsecured creditors will ride-through paid in full.

  • The major parties to the RSA will get releases under the proposed plan: creditors who vote to reject the plan will need to affirmatively opt-out of the releases.

The debtors already commenced solicitation and hope to confirm the plan on or about August 19. The post-reorg capital structure will look like this:

Screen Shot 2020-07-21 at 11.33.25 AM.png

The above graphic is the biggest “tell” that the filing is predominantly about access to fresh capital. The deleveraging (of only $100mm) is rather secondary and inconsequential relative to the $200mm cash infusion. Which begs the question: if the debtors perform dramatically under business plan in coming years — perhaps, uh, due to a decrease in international student travel — will the company be in need of another restructuring? PETITION Note: as we write this, a talking head is pontificating on CNBC that business travel will be significantly lower in coming years than it had been — confirming the premise of this Bloomberg piece. If parents aren’t traveling for work, will they let their children travel for school?

The debtors certainly acknowledge the risks. In the “risk factors” section of their Disclosure Statement, they note that a “second wave” of COVID-19 could impact results (PETITION Note: we need to conquer the “first wave” to get to the “second wave,” but, yeah, sure.). They state:

The Debtors cannot predict when any of the various international or domestic travel restrictions will be eased or lifted. Moreover, even when travel advisories and restrictions are lifted, demand for study abroad and student travel may remain reduced for a significant length of time, and the Debtors cannot predict if and when demand will return to pre-pandemic levels. Due to the discretionary nature of educational travel spending, the Debtors’ revenues are heavily influenced by the condition of the U.S. economy and economies in other regions of the world. Unfavorable conditions in these broader economies have resulted, and may result in the future, in decreased demand for educational travel, changes in booking practices and related policies by the Debtors’ competitors, all of which in turn have had, and may have in the future, a strong negative effect on the Debtors’ business. In particular, the Debtors’ bookings may be negatively impacted by the adverse changes in the perceived or actual economic climate, including higher unemployment rates, declines in income levels and loss of personal wealth resulting from the impact of COVID-19. The Debtors’ bookings may also be impacted by continued and prolonged school closings.

And they add:

This is the first time since September 11, 2001 that the Debtors have suspended their tours, and is the first time the Debtors have completely suspended their tours for an extended period of time. As a result of these unprecedented circumstances, the Debtors are not able to predict the full impact of such a suspension. In particular, the Debtors cannot predict the impact on financial performance and cash flows required for cash refunds of fares for cancelled tours as a result of a suspension of tours if such suspensions are prolonged further than anticipated, as well as the public’s concern regarding the health and safety of travel, and related decreases in demand for travel. Depending on the length of the suspension and level of customer acceptance of future tour credits, the Debtors may be required to provide additional cash refunds for a substantial portion of the balance of deferred tours, as customers who have opted to defer tours may request a cash refund.

And so it looks like the debtors are conservatively projecting $367.9mm of revenue in fiscal year 2021, slightly more than half of what they did in ‘19. They don’t expect to revert back to projected ‘20 numbers until at least 2024. Yes, 2024.

Screen Shot 2020-07-21 at 1.28.26 PM.png

Now, generally, projections are almost always worthless. As the debtors’ risk factors suggest here, they may be even more worthless than usual depending upon how COVID shakes out. At least management appears to be realistic here that the business will not return to pre-COVID levels for some time. Let’s hope that a vaccine comes and they’re positioned to surprise to the upside.**

_____

*$150mm of pre-petition secured debt will roll-up into the DIP.

**Houlihan Lokey pegs valuation between approximately $625mm and $745mm as of September 30, 2020.

  • Jurisdiction: S.D. of New York (Judge Garrity)

  • Capital Structure: $642mm RCF/TL/LOCs, $126mm subordinated seller notes

  • Professionals:

    • Legal: Kirkland & Ellis LLP (Nicole Greenblatt, Jennifer Perkins, Susan Golden, Whitney Fogelberg, Kimberly Pageau, Elizabeth Jones)

    • DIrectors: Bob Gobel, Lisa Mayr (ID)

    • Financial Advisor: KPMG LLP (James Grace, Thomas Bibby)

    • Investment Banker: Houlihan Lokey Capital Inc. (Sam Handler, Stephen Spencer)

    • Claims Agent: Stretto (*click on the link above for free docket access)

  • Other Parties in Interest:

    • Prepetition & DIP Agent: Goldman Sachs Bank USA

      • Legal: Latham & Watkins LLP (Adam Goldberg, Hugh Murtagh)

    • Seller Noteholders: Metalmark Capital Holdings LLC & Silverhawk Capital Partners

      • Legal: Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP (Michael Davis)

    • Sponsors: Eurazeo North America & Primavera Capital Limited

      • Legal: Cravath Swaine & Moore LLP (Paul Zumbro, George Zobitz) & Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP (Michael Torkin)

      • Financial Advisor: PJT Partners LP

    • Ad Hoc Group of Consenting Lenders

      • Legal: Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP (Scott Greenberg, Steven Domanowski, Jeremy Evans)

      • Financial Advisor: Rothschild & Co.

New Chapter 11 Filing - FirstEnergy Solutions Corp.

in

FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. 

March 31, 2018

#MAGA!!

FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. ("FES"), the wholly-owned subsidiary of publicly-traded (non-debtor) FirstEnergy Corp. has filed a "freefall" bankruptcy in the Northern District of Ohio. FES is a provider of "unregulated"-yet-regulated energy-related products and services to retail and wholesale customers primarily in Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania. It owns and operates (a) fossil generating facilities (read: coal) in Ohio (three) and Philadelphia (one) through its FirstEnergy Generation subsidiary ("FG") and, (b) 3 nuclear generating facilities (two in Ohio and one in Philadelphia)through its FirstEnergy Nuclear Generation LLC ("NG") subsidiary. 

For those of you who aren't power geeks - and we confess that we are not - this filing gives a pretty solid primer on how United States' power production and distribution works. Or doesn't work - depending on your point of view, we suppose. We summarize some high points here but if you're especially nerdy and want to understand the power industry better, read docket number 55. You can find it via the case name link above. 

A big piece of this bankruptcy filing is the debtors' retail electricity business. Retail sellers of electricity are subject to state-applied "Renewable Portfolio Standards" ("RPS") that requires sellers to obtain a certain percentage or amount of its power supply from renewable energy sources. One way to comply is through the purchase of renewable energy credits ("RECs"). Historically, FES has obtained RECs to comply with the RPS via eight power purchase agreements entered into between 2003-2011 with various wind and solar power producers. But apparently things have changed considerably since then. And FES no longer wants the RECs. 

What's changed? Now FES's actual and projected sales are much lower. Per the company in more detail: 

"The main drivers to the collapse in prices include:
• Lower natural gas prices due to continued improvements in natural gas fracking;
• Excess generating capacity due in part to lower than expected load growth;
• Lower cost of construction for renewable technologies, and/or improved performance (e.g., higher capacity factors); and
• Surplus of RECs."

Also, future market prices and outlook for power and RECs are projected materially lower. RPS mandates are less demanding (#MAGA!!). And the supply of RECs is significantly greater. Said another way: energy disruption. From frackers pushing a rapid expansion in nat gas supplies which, in turn, caused plummeting electricity prices and reduced profits. From regulation and the rise of renewables. From energy efficient electronics. 

Per the company, "While the PPAs made sense to FES at the time they were entered into, a dramatic downturn in the energy market and prices of RECs now renders these contracts extremely burdensome and uneconomic to FES." They're also, according to the debtor, unnecessary: FES is phasing out its retail business and, today, expects to sell less than half of the amount of power this year that it sold in 2013. Consequently, FES seeks to reject those PPAs in bankruptcy.

Which is not the only PPA it seeks to reject. The debtor also seeks to shed its multi-party intercompany PPA pursuant to which it and several other power companies purchase power generated via fossil fuel from the Ohio Valley Electric Corporation ("OVEC"). The debtor alleges that this obligation is priced at above-market rates. And because FES sells very little wholesale power emanating out of the OVEC PPA, it stands to lose approximately $268 million from the deal. Yikes. 

The issue, though, is whether the rejection of the nine PPAs will cause disruption to the continued supply of wholesale electricity or impact the reliability of the transmission grid in the regional transmission organization that governs FES and FG. That generally means YOUR electricity - if you live in the Northeast. Naturally, the debtor argues it won't. The federal government may think otherwise. And this is precisely why the company filed an action seeking a declaratory judgment and injunction against the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") to prevent the feds from hindering -- on the basis of the Federal Power Act -- the company's attempts to reject the PPAs under the federal bankruptcy code. FERC regulates the wholesale power market. It is also why the company has filed a request for assistance from Rick Perry, President Trump's Energy Secretary. This is some real dramatic sh*t folks: a conflict between federal statutes with efforts for executive branch intervention. Someone dial up Daniel Day-Lewis and bring him out of retirement: this could be the next "Lincoln." 

So, in a nutshell: the company filed for bankruptcy because it needs to leverage the bankruptcy code's debtor-friendly provisions to shed some burdensome contracts - including the PPAs. It also needs to address its cost structure, its over-levered balance sheet (in terms of interest payments and near-term maturities), and lease payments under certain sale-leaseback arrangements related to one of its power facilities. Said another way, this is a full-stop restructuring: both operational and financial in nature. There is a "Process Support Agreement" with various parties in interest which reflects a good faith commitment to cooperate on first day motions, implementation of employee retention and severance programs, and establishing a protocol for the disposition of company assets. Sounds great but it doesn't really promise any certainty given the various claims and regulatory issues. Buckle your seat belts. 

Some additional things of note:

  • "Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!" (Long Don Corleone). Ironically in the week that Westinghouse Electric Corp. emerged out of its own bankruptcy proceeding, it may now find itself back in bankruptcy court for purposes of adjudicating its $2.36 million trade claim.
  • Coal (#MAGA!!). A first order of business is the debtor is seeking to reject its coal transportation agreements with BNSF Railway Company ((owned by Berkshire Hathaway ($BRK.A)) and Norfolk Southern Railway Company ($NSC). Why? It expects to order 200,000 tons of coal less than the 2.5 million tons of coal minimum requirement delineated in the contract. The debtor claims that rejection of the contract will save it $105.6 million over the next 12 months as it replaces rail with barge transportation. 
  • Commodities. The company also seeks to reject certain uranium supply contracts because (i) it already has enough uranium inventory for the rest of 2018 and 2019, (ii) the spot price for uranium has dropped precipitously since entering into the agreements (from $36 and $48 per pound, respectively, to $22 per pound), and (iii) there is "ample supply of uranium available in the market." 
  • Professional Retentions: Two law firms represent the Ad Hoc Group of Holders of the 6.85% Pass Through Certificates due 2034 because George Davis departed O'Melveny & Myers LLP for Latham & Watkins LLP. 
 
  • Jurisdiction: N.D. of Ohio (Judge Koschik)
  • Capital Structure: $3.8 billion funded debt     

    • FES

      • $700 million secured revolving credit facility, ~$332 million of '21 6.05% unsecured notes; (c) ~$363 million of '39 6.80% unsecured notes; and (d) $150 million revolving credit note with Allegheny Energy Supply Company, LLC under which $102 million is currently outstanding and is due on April 2, 2018. 

    • FG

      • ~$328 million of secured fixed-rate pollution control revenue notes ("PCNs"); ~$677 million of unsecured fixed-rate PCNs

    • NG

      • ~$285 million of secured PCNs; ~$842 million of unsecured PCNs

  • Company Professionals:
    • Legal: Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP (Ira Dizengoff, Lisa Beckerman, Brad Kahn, Scott Alberino, Kate Doorley, David Applebaum, Todd Brecher, Sean O'Donnell, Rachel Presa, Brian Carney, Abid Qureshi, Joseph Sorkin, David Zensky) & (local) Brouse McDowell LPA (Marc Merklin, Kate Bradley, Bridget Franklin) & (conflicts) Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
    • Financial Advisor/CRO: Alvarez & Marsal North America LLC (Charles Moore)
    • Investment Banker: Lazard Ltd. 
    • Claims Agent: Prime Clerk LLC (*click on company name for docket)
    • Special Nuclear Regulatory Counsel: Hogan Lovells US LLP
    • Industry Consultants: ICF International Inc.
    • Special Litigation Counsel: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP
    • Tax Consultant: KPMG US LLP
    • Communications Consultant: Sitrick and Company
  • Other Parties in Interest:
    • Board of Directors of FirstEnergy Corp. 
      • Legal: Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP (Stephen Lerner, Peter Morrison, Julia Furlong)
    • Wilmington Savings Fund Society FSB
      • Legal: KIlpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP (Todd Meyers, Michael Langford) & (local) McDonald Hopkins LLC (Michael Kaczka, Scott Opincar, Maria Carr)
    • Indenture Trustee: Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A.
    • Indenture Trustee to PCNs: UMB Bank, National Association
    • Ad Hoc Group of Holders of the 6.85% Pass Through Certificates due 2034
      • Legal: O'Melveny & Myers LLP & Latham & Watkins LLP
      • Financial Advisor: Guggenheim Partners LLC
    • Ad Hoc Group of Holders of PCNs issued by FG and NG
      • Legal: Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP 
      • Financial Advisor: GLC Advisors & Co.
    • Contract Counterparty: BNSF Railway Company
      • Legal: Whitmer & Eherman LLC (Mary Whitmer, James Ehrman, Robert Stefancin)
    • Non-debtor Parent: FirstEnergy Corp.
      • Legal: Jones Day (Heather Lennox, Thomas Wilson)