UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549

 

Form 10-K

 

 

 

 

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT:
None

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  YES  o      No  þ

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  YES o      No  þ

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter periods as the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  YES þ      NO o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes  o      No  o

 

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.   þ

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act)  YES  o      NO  þ

 

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of March 31, 2010 is $525,730,940. The registrant had 54,550,290 shares of common stock outstanding as of September 30, 2010.

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

 

None

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

would permit us to borrow up to approximately $642.2 million, notwithstanding other limitations on our borrowings pursuant to our credit facilities.

 

If we receive an exemption from the SEC for our SBA debt, we will have increased capacity to fund up to $150 million (the maximum amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures an SBIC may currently have outstanding once certain conditions have been met) of investments with SBA-guaranteed debentures in addition to being able to fund investments with borrowings up to the maximum amount of debt that the 200% asset coverage ratio limitation would allow us to incur. As a result, we would, in effect, be permitted to have a lower asset coverage ratio than the 200% asset coverage ratio limitation under the 1940 Act and, therefore, we could have more debt outstanding than assets to cover such debt. For example, we would be able to borrow up to $150 million more than the approximately $642.2 million permitted under the asset coverage ratio limit as of September 30, 2010. For additional information on SBA regulations that affect our access to SBA-guaranteed debentures, see “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure — Our SBIC subsidiary’s investment adviser has no prior experience managing an SBIC and any failure to comply with SBA regulations, resulting from our SBIC subsidiary’s investment adviser’s lack of experience or otherwise, could have an adverse effect on our operations.”

 

Our principal executive office is located at 10 Bank Street, 12 ^th floor, White Plains, New York 10606 and our telephone number is (914) 286-6800.

 

The Investment Adviser

 

Our investment adviser is affiliated with Fifth Street Capital LLC, a private investment firm founded and managed by Leonard M. Tannenbaum who has led the investment of over $900 million in small and mid-sized companies, including the investments made by us, since 1998. Mr. Tannenbaum and his respective private investment firms have acted as the lead (and often sole) first or second lien investor in over 70 investment transactions. The other investment funds managed by these private investment firms generally are fully committed and, other than follow-on investments in existing portfolio companies, are no longer making investments.

 

We benefit from our investment adviser’s ability to identify attractive investment opportunities, conduct diligence on and value prospective investments, negotiate investments and manage a diversified portfolio of those investments. The principals of our investment adviser have broad investment backgrounds, with prior experience at investment funds, investment banks and other financial services companies and have developed a broad network of contacts within the private equity community. This network of contacts provides our principal source of investment opportunities.

 

The principals of our investment adviser are Mr. Tannenbaum, our chief executive officer and our investment adviser’s managing partner, Bernard D. Berman, our president, chief compliance officer and secretary and a partner of our investment adviser, Ivelin M. Dimitrov, our co-chief investment officer and a partner of our investment adviser, Chad Blakeman, our co-chief investment officer, Juan E. Alva, a partner of our investment adviser, Casey J. Zmijeski, a partner of our investment adviser and William H. Craig, our chief financial officer.

 

Business Strategy

 

Our investment objective is to maximize our portfolio’s total return by generating current income from our debt investments and capital appreciation from our equity investments. We have adopted the following business strategy to achieve our investment objective:

 

 

 

Investment Criteria

 

The principals of our investment adviser have identified the following investment criteria and guidelines for use in evaluating prospective portfolio companies and they use these criteria and guidelines in evaluating investment opportunities for us. However, not all of these criteria and guidelines were, or will be, met in connection with each of our investments.

 

 

Deal Origination

 

Our deal originating efforts are focused on building relationships with private equity sponsors that are focused on investing in the small and mid-sized companies that we target. We divide the country geographically into Eastern, Central and Western regions and emphasize active, consistent sponsor coverage. Over the last ten years, the investment professionals of our investment adviser have developed an extensive network of relationships with these private equity sponsors. We estimate that there are approximately 1,400 of such private equity firms and our investment adviser has active relationships with approximately 140 of them. An active relationship is one through which our investment adviser has received at least one investment opportunity from the private equity sponsor within the last year.

 

Our investment adviser reviewed over 500 potential investment transactions with private equity sponsors for the year ended September 30, 2010. All of the investment transactions that we have completed to date

were originated through our investment adviser’s relationships with private equity sponsors. We believe that our investment adviser has a reputation as a reliable, responsive and efficient source of funding to support private equity investments. We believe that this reputation and the relationships of our investment adviser with private equity sponsors will provide us with significant investment opportunities.

 

Our origination process is designed to efficiently evaluate a large number of opportunities and to identify the most attractive of such opportunities. A significant number of opportunities that clearly do not fit our investment criteria are screened by the partners of our investment adviser when they are initially identified. If an originator believes that an opportunity fits our investment criteria and merits consideration, the investment is presented to our investment adviser’s Investment Committee. This is the first stage of our origination process, the “Review” stage. During this stage, the originator gives a preliminary description of the opportunity. This is followed by preliminary due diligence, from which an investment summary is created. The opportunity may be discussed several times by the full Investment Committee of our investment adviser, or subsets of that Committee. At any point in this stage, we may reject the opportunity, and, indeed, we have historically decided not to proceed with more than 80% of the investment opportunities reviewed by our investment adviser’s Investment Committee.

 

For the subset of opportunities that we decide to pursue, we issue preliminary term sheets and classify them in the “Term Sheet Issued” stage. This term sheet serves as a basis for negotiating the critical terms of a transaction. At this stage we begin our underwriting and investment approval process, as more fully described below. After the term sheet for a potential transaction has been fully negotiated, the transaction is presented to our investment adviser’s Investment Committee for approval. If the deal is approved, the term sheet is signed. Approximately half of the term sheets we issue result in an executed term sheet. Our underwriting and investment approval process is ongoing during this stage, during which we begin documentation of the loan. The final stage, “Closings,” culminates with the funding of an investment only after all due diligence is satisfactorily completed and all closing conditions, including the sponsor’s funding of its investment in the portfolio company, have been satisfied.

 

Underwriting

 

Underwriting Process and Investment Approval

 

We make our investment decisions only after consideration of a number of factors regarding the potential investment including, but not limited to: (i) historical and projected financial performance; (ii) company and industry specific characteristics, such as strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats; (iii) composition and experience of the management team; and (iv) track record of the private equity sponsor leading the transaction. Our investment adviser uses a proprietary scoring system that evaluates each opportunity. This methodology is employed to screen a high volume of potential investment opportunities on a consistent basis.

 

If an investment is deemed appropriate to pursue, a more detailed and rigorous evaluation is made along a variety of investment parameters, not all of which may be relevant or considered in evaluating a potential investment opportunity. The following outlines the general parameters and areas of evaluation and due diligence for investment decisions, although not all will necessarily be considered or given equal weighting in the evaluation process.

 

Management assessment

 

Our investment adviser makes an in-depth assessment of the management team, including evaluation along several key metrics:

 

 

 

Industry dynamics

 

An evaluation of the industry is undertaken by our investment adviser that considers several factors. If considered appropriate, industry experts will be consulted or retained. The following factors are analyzed by our investment adviser:

 

 

Business model and financial assessment

 

Prior to making an investment decision, our investment adviser will undertake a review and analysis of the financial and strategic plans for the potential investment. There is significant evaluation of and reliance upon the due diligence performed by the private equity sponsor and third party experts including accountants and consultants. Areas of evaluation include:

 

 

Private equity sponsor

 

Among the most critical due diligence investigations is the evaluation of the private equity sponsor making the investment. A private equity sponsor is typically the controlling shareholder upon completion of an investment and as such is considered critical to the success of the investment. The private equity sponsor is evaluated along several key criteria, including:

 

 

Investments

 

We target debt investments that will yield meaningful current income and provide the opportunity for capital appreciation through equity securities. We typically structure our debt investments with the maximum seniority and collateral that we can reasonably obtain while seeking to achieve our total return target. In most cases, our debt investment will be collateralized by a first or second lien on the assets of the portfolio company. As of September 30, 2010, substantially all of our debt investments were secured by first or second priority liens on the assets of the portfolio company.

Debt Investments

 

We tailor the terms of our debt investments to the facts and circumstances of the transaction and prospective portfolio company, negotiating a structure that seeks to protect our rights and manage our risk while creating incentives for the portfolio company to achieve its business plan. A substantial source of return is monthly cash interest that we collect on our debt investments. As of September 30, 2010, we directly originated 100% of our loans, although we may not directly originate 100% of our investments in the future. We are currently focusing our new origination efforts on first lien loans. We believe that the risk-adjusted returns from these loans are superior to second lien investments and offer superior credit quality. However, we may choose to originate second lien and unsecured loans in the future.

 

 

We typically structure our debt investments to include covenants that seek to minimize our risk of capital loss. Our debt investments have strong protections, including default penalties, information rights, board observation rights, and affirmative, negative and financial covenants, such as lien protection and prohibitions against change of control. Our debt investments also have substantial prepayment penalties designed to extend the life of the average loan, which we believe will help to grow our portfolio.

 

Equity Investments

 

When we make a debt investment, we may be granted equity in the company in the same class of security as the sponsor receives upon funding. In addition, we may from time to time make non-control, equity co-investments in connection with private equity sponsors. We generally seek to structure our equity investments, such as direct equity co-investments, to provide us with minority rights provisions and event-driven put rights. We also seek to obtain limited registration rights in connection with these investments, which may include “piggyback” registration rights.

 

Private Equity Fund Investments

 

We make investments in the private equity funds of certain of our equity sponsors. In general, we make these investments where we have a long term relationship and are comfortable with the sponsor’s business model and investment strategy. As of September 30, 2010, we had investments in three private equity funds, which represented less than 1% of the fair value of our assets as of such date.

Portfolio Management

 

Active Involvement in our Portfolio Companies

 

As a business development company, we are obligated to offer to provide managerial assistance to our portfolio companies and to provide it if requested. In fact, we provide managerial assistance to our portfolio companies as a general practice and we seek investments where such assistance is appropriate. We monitor the financial trends of each portfolio company to assess the appropriate course of action for each company and to evaluate overall portfolio quality. We have several methods of evaluating and monitoring the performance of our investments, including but not limited to, the following:

 

 

Rating Criteria

 

In addition to various risk management and monitoring tools, we use an investment rating system to characterize and monitor the credit profile and our expected level of returns on each investment in our portfolio. We use a five-level numeric rating scale. The following is a description of the conditions associated with each investment rating:

 

 

In the event that we determine that an investment is underperforming, or circumstances suggest that the risk associated with a particular investment has significantly increased, we will undertake more aggressive monitoring of the effected portfolio company. While our investment rating system identifies the relative risk for each investment, the rating alone does not dictate the scope and/or frequency of any monitoring that we perform. The frequency of our monitoring of an investment is determined by a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the trends in the financial performance of the portfolio company, the investment structure and the type of collateral securing our investment, if any.

The following table shows the distribution of our investments on the 1 to 5 investment rating scale at fair value as of September 30, 2010:

 

 

Exit Strategies/Refinancing

 

As of September 30, 2010, we had structured $7.1 million in aggregate exit fees across 10 portfolio investments to be received upon the future exit of those investments. We expect to exit our investments typically through one of three scenarios: (i) the sale of the company resulting in repayment of all outstanding debt, (ii) the recapitalization of the company in which our loan is replaced with debt or equity from a third party or parties or (iii) the repayment of the initial or remaining principal amount of our loan then outstanding at maturity. In some investments, there may be scheduled amortization of some portion of our loan which would result in a partial exit of our investment prior to the maturity of the loan.

 

Valuation of Portfolio Investments

 

As a business development company, we generally invest in illiquid securities including debt and equity investments of small and mid-sized companies. All of our investments are recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our Board of Directors.

 

Authoritative accounting guidance defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Where available, fair value is based on observable market prices or parameters or derived from such prices or parameters. Where observable prices or inputs are not available or reliable, valuation techniques are applied. These valuation techniques involve some level of management estimation and judgment, the degree of which is dependent on the price transparency for the investments or market and the investments’ complexity.

 

In accordance with authoritative accounting guidance, we perform detailed valuations of our debt and equity investments on an individual basis, using market, income, and bond yield approaches as appropriate. In general, we utilize a bond yield method for the majority of our investments, as long as it is appropriate. If, in our judgment, the bond yield approach is not appropriate, we may use the enterprise value approach, or, in certain cases, an alternative methodology potentially including an asset liquidation or expected recovery model.

 

Under the market approach, we estimate the enterprise value of the portfolio companies in which we invest. There is no one methodology to estimate enterprise value and, in fact, for any one portfolio company, enterprise value is best expressed as a range of fair values, from which we derive a single estimate of enterprise value. To estimate the enterprise value of a portfolio company, we analyze various factors, including the portfolio company’s historical and projected financial results. Typically, private companies are valued based on multiples of EBITDA, cash flows, net income, revenues, or in limited cases, book value. We generally require portfolio companies to provide annual audited and quarterly and monthly unaudited financial statements, as well as annual projections for the upcoming fiscal year.

 

Under the income approach, we generally prepare and analyze discounted cash flow models based on projections of the future free cash flows of the business.

 

Under the bond yield approach, we use bond yield models to determine the present value of the future cash flow streams of our debt investments. We review various sources of transactional data, including private

mergers and acquisitions involving debt investments with similar characteristics, and assess the information in the valuation process.

 

Our Board of Directors undertakes a multi-step valuation process each quarter in connection with determining the fair value of our investments:

 

 

The fair value of all of our investments at September 30, 2010 and September 30, 2009 was determined by our Board of Directors. Our Board of Directors is solely responsible for the valuation of the portfolio investments at fair value as determined in good faith pursuant to our valuation policy and a consistently applied valuation process.

 

Our Board of Directors has engaged independent valuation firms to provide us with valuation assistance. Upon completion of their process each quarter, the independent valuation firms provide us with a written report regarding the preliminary valuations of selected portfolio securities as of the close of such quarter. We will continue to engage independent valuation firms to provide us with assistance regarding our determination of the fair value of selected portfolio securities each quarter; however, our Board of Directors is ultimately and solely responsible for determining the fair value of our investments in good faith.

The percentages of our portfolio at fair value for which independent valuation firms provided us with valuation assistance by period were as follows:

 

 

 

 

We intend to have valuation firms provide us with valuation assistance on a portion of our portfolio on a quarterly basis and a substantial portion of our portfolio on an annual basis.

 

Determination of fair values involves subjective judgments and estimates. The notes to our financial statements refer to the uncertainty with respect to the possible effect of such valuations, and any change in such valuations, on our financial statements.

 

Competition

 

We compete for investments with a number of business development companies and investment funds (including private equity funds and mezzanine funds), as well as traditional financial services companies such as commercial banks and other sources of financing. Many of these entities have greater financial and managerial resources than we do. We believe we are able to be competitive with these entities primarily on the basis of the experience and contacts of our management team, our responsive and efficient investment analysis and decision-making processes, the investment terms we offer, and our willingness to make smaller investments.

 

We believe that some of our competitors make loans with interest rates and returns that are comparable to or lower than the rates and returns that we target. Therefore, we do not seek to compete solely on the interest rates and returns that we offer to potential portfolio companies. For additional information concerning the competitive risks we face, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure — We may face increasing competition for investment opportunities, which could reduce returns and result in losses.”

 

Employees

 

We do not have any employees. Our day-to-day investment operations are managed by our investment adviser. See “— Investment Advisory Agreement.” Our investment adviser employs a total of 19 investment professionals, including its principals. In addition, we reimburse our administrator, FSC, Inc., for the allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by it in performing its obligations under an administration agreement, including the compensation of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer, and their staff. FSC, Inc. has voluntarily determined to forgo receiving reimbursement for the services performed for us

by our chief compliance officer, Bernard D. Berman, given his compensation arrangement with our investment adviser. However, although FSC, Inc. currently intends to forgo its right to receive such reimbursement, it is under no obligation to do so and may cease to do so at any time in the future. For a more detailed discussion of the administration agreement, see “Item 1. Business — Administration Agreement.”

 

Investment Advisory Agreement

 

Overview of Our Investment Adviser

 

Management Services

 

Our investment adviser, Fifth Street Management, is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, or the “Advisers Act.” Our investment adviser serves pursuant to the investment advisory agreement in accordance with the 1940 Act. Subject to the overall supervision of our Board of Directors, our investment adviser manages our day-to-day operations and provides us with investment advisory services. Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, our investment adviser:

 

 

Our investment adviser’s services under the investment advisory agreement may not be exclusive and it is free to furnish similar services to other entities so long as its services to us are not impaired.

 

Management Fee

 

We pay our investment adviser a fee for its services under the investment advisory agreement consisting of two components — a base management fee and an incentive fee. The cost of both the base management fee payable to our investment adviser and any incentive fees earned by our investment adviser will ultimately be borne by our common stockholders.

 

Base Management Fee

 

The base management fee is calculated at an annual rate of 2% of our gross assets, which includes any borrowings for investment purposes. The base management fee is payable quarterly in arrears, and is calculated based on the value of our gross assets at the end of each fiscal quarter, and appropriately adjusted on a pro rata basis for any equity capital raises or repurchases during such quarter. The base management fee for any partial month or quarter will be appropriately pro rated. Our investment adviser permanently waived the portion of the base management fee attributable to cash and cash equivalents (as defined in the notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements) as of the end of each quarter beginning March 31, 2010. As a result, our base management fee will be calculated at an annual rate of 2% of our gross assets, including any investments made with borrowings, but excluding any cash and cash equivalents (as defined in the notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements) as of the end of each quarter.

 

Incentive Fee

 

The incentive fee has two parts. The first part is calculated and payable quarterly in arrears based on our “Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income” for the immediately preceding fiscal quarter. For this purpose, “Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income” means interest income, dividend income and any other income (including any other fees (other than fees for providing managerial assistance), such as commitment, origination, structuring, diligence and consulting fees or other fees that we receive from portfolio companies) accrued during the fiscal quarter, minus our operating expenses for the quarter (including the base management fee, expenses payable under the administration agreement with FSC, Inc., and any interest expense and

dividends paid on any issued and outstanding preferred stock, but excluding the incentive fee). Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income includes, in the case of investments with a deferred interest feature (such as original issue discount, debt instruments with PIK interest and zero coupon securities), accrued income that we have not yet received in cash. Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income does not include any realized capital gains, realized capital losses or unrealized capital appreciation or depreciation. Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income, expressed as a rate of return on the value of our net assets at the end of the immediately preceding fiscal quarter, will be compared to a “hurdle rate” of 2% per quarter (8% annualized), subject to a “catch-up” provision measured as of the end of each fiscal quarter. Our net investment income used to calculate this part of the incentive fee is also included in the amount of our gross assets used to calculate the 2% base management fee. The operation of the incentive fee with respect to our Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income for each quarter is as follows:

 

 

The following is a graphical representation of the calculation of the income-related portion of the incentive fee:

 

Quarterly Incentive Fee Based on “Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income”

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income
(expressed as a percentage of the value of net assets)

 

 

Percentage of Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment
Income allocated to income-related portion of incentive fee

 

The second part of the incentive fee is determined and payable in arrears as of the end of each fiscal year (or upon termination of the investment advisory agreement, as of the termination date) and equals 20% of our realized capital gains, if any, on a cumulative basis from inception through the end of each fiscal year, computed net of all realized capital losses and unrealized capital depreciation on a cumulative basis, less the aggregate amount of any previously paid capital gain incentive fees, provided that, the incentive fee determined as of September 30, 2008 was calculated for a period of shorter than twelve calendar months to take into account any realized capital gains computed net of all realized capital losses and unrealized capital depreciation from inception.

 

Example 1: Income Related Portion of Incentive Fee for Each Fiscal Quarter

 

Alternative 1

 

Assumptions

 

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 1.25%
Hurdle rate(1) = 2%
Management fee(2) = 0.5%
Other expenses (legal, accounting, custodian, transfer agent, etc.)(3) = 0.2%
Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income
(investment income − (management fee + other expenses) = 0.55%

 

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income does not exceed hurdle rate, therefore there is no income-related incentive fee.

 

Alternative 2

 

Assumptions

 

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 2.9%

Hurdle rate(1) = 2%

Management fee(2) = 0.5%

Other expenses (legal, accounting, custodian, transfer agent, etc.)(3) = 0.2%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income

(investment income − (management fee + other expenses) = 2.2%

 

 

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income exceeds the hurdle rate, but does not fully satisfy the “catch-up” provision, therefore the income related portion of the incentive fee is 0.2%.

 

Alternative 3

 

Assumptions

 

Investment income (including interest, dividends, fees, etc.) = 3.5%

Hurdle rate(1) = 2%

Management fee(2) = 0.5%

Other expenses (legal, accounting, custodian, transfer agent, etc.)(3) = 0.2%

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income

(investment income − (management fee + other expenses) = 2.8%

Incentive fee = 100% × Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income (subject to “catch-up”)(4)

Incentive fee = 100% × “catch-up” + (20% × (Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income − 2.5%))

= 0.5% + (20% × 0.3%)

= 0.5% + 0.06%

= 0.56%

 

Pre-Incentive Fee Net Investment Income exceeds the hurdle rate, and fully satisfies the “catch-up” provision, therefore the income related portion of the incentive fee is 0.56%.

 

 

 

 

Example 2: Capital Gains Portion of Incentive Fee(*):

 

Alternative 1:

 

Assumptions

 

Year 1: $20 million investment made in Company A (“Investment A”), and $30 million investment made in Company B (“Investment B”)

 

Year 2: Investment A sold for $50 million and fair market value (“FMV”) of Investment B determined to be $32 million

 

Year 3: FMV of Investment B determined to be $25 million

 

Year 4: Investment B sold for $31 million

 

The capital gains portion of the incentive fee would be:

 

Year 1: None

 

Year 2: Capital gains incentive fee of $6 million — ($30 million realized capital gains on sale of Investment A multiplied by 20%)

 

Year 3: None — $5 million (20% multiplied by ($30 million cumulative capital gains less $5 million cumulative capital depreciation)) less $6 million (previous capital gains fee paid in Year 2)

 

Year 4: Capital gains incentive fee of $200,000 — $6.2 million ($31 million cumulative realized capital gains multiplied by 20%) less $6 million (capital gains incentive fee taken in Year 2)

 

Alternative 2

 

Assumptions

 

Year 1: $20 million investment made in Company A (“Investment A”), $30 million investment made in Company B (“Investment B”) and $25 million investment made in Company C (“Investment C”)

 

Year 2: Investment A sold for $50 million, FMV of Investment B determined to be $25 million and FMV of Investment C determined to be $25 million

 

Year 3: FMV of Investment B determined to be $27 million and Investment C sold for $30 million

 

Year 4: FMV of Investment B determined to be $35 million

 

Year 5: Investment B sold for $20 million

 

The capital gains incentive fee, if any, would be:

 

Year 1: None

 

Year 2: $5 million capital gains incentive fee — 20% multiplied by $25 million ($30 million realized capital gains on Investment A less unrealized capital depreciation on Investment B)

 

Year 3: $1.4 million capital gains incentive fee(1) — $6.4 million (20% multiplied by $32 million ($35 million cumulative realized capital gains less $3 million unrealized capital depreciation)) less $5 million capital gains incentive fee received in Year 2

 

Year 4: None

 

Year 5: None — $5 million (20% multiplied by $25 million (cumulative realized capital gains of $35 million less realized capital losses of $10 million)) less $6.4 million cumulative capital gains incentive fee paid in Year 2 and Year 3(2)

 

 

 

 

Payment of Our Expenses

 

Our primary operating expenses are the payment of a base management fee and any incentive fees under the investment advisory agreement and the allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by FSC, Inc. in performing its obligations under the administration agreement. Our investment management fee compensates our investment adviser for its work in identifying, evaluating, negotiating, executing and servicing our investments. We bear all other expenses of our operations and transactions, including (without limitation) fees and expenses relating to:

 

 

Duration and Termination

 

The investment advisory agreement was first approved by our Board of Directors on December 13, 2007 and by a majority of the limited partners of Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners III, L.P. through a written consent first solicited on December 14, 2007. On March 14, 2008, our Board of Directors, including all of the directors who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act, approved an amendment to the investment advisory agreement that revised the investment advisory agreement to clarify the calculation of the base management fee. Such amendment was also approved by a majority of our outstanding voting securities through a written consent first solicited on April 7, 2008. Unless earlier terminated as described below, the investment advisory agreement, as amended, will remain in effect for a period of two years from the date it was approved by the Board of Directors and will remain in effect from year-to-year thereafter if approved annually by the Board of Directors or by the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of our outstanding voting securities, including, in either case, approval by a majority of our directors who are not interested persons. The investment advisory agreement will automatically terminate in the event of its assignment. The investment advisory agreement may be terminated by either party without penalty upon not more than 60 days’ written notice to the other. The investment advisory agreement may also be terminated, without penalty, upon the vote of a majority of our outstanding voting securities.

 

Indemnification

 

The investment advisory agreement provides that, absent willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of their respective duties or by reason of the reckless disregard of their respective duties and obligations, our investment adviser and its officers, managers, agents, employees, controlling persons, members (or their owners) and any other person or entity affiliated with it, are entitled to indemnification from us for any damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and amounts reasonably paid in settlement) arising from the rendering of our investment adviser’s services under the investment advisory agreement or otherwise as our investment adviser.

 

Organization of our Investment Adviser

 

Our investment adviser is a Delaware limited liability company that registered as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. The principal address of our investment adviser is 10 Bank Street, 12 ^th Floor, White Plains, NY 10606.

 

Board Approval of the Investment Advisory Agreement

 

At a meeting of our Board of Directors held on February 24, 2010, our Board of Directors unanimously voted to approve the investment advisory agreement. In reaching a decision to approve the investment advisory agreement, the Board of Directors reviewed a significant amount of information and considered, among other things:

 

 

 

Based on the information reviewed and the discussions detailed above, the Board of Directors, including all of the directors who are not “interested persons” as defined in the 1940 Act, concluded that the investment advisory fee rates and terms are reasonable in relation to the services provided and approved the investment advisory agreement and the administration agreement as being in the best interests of our stockholders.

 

Administration Agreement

 

We have also entered into an administration agreement with FSC, Inc. under which FSC, Inc. provides administrative services for us, including office facilities and equipment and clerical, bookkeeping and recordkeeping services at such facilities. Under the administration agreement, FSC, Inc. also performs, or oversees the performance of, our required administrative services, which includes being responsible for the financial records which we are required to maintain and preparing reports to our stockholders and reports filed with the SEC. In addition, FSC, Inc. assists us in determining and publishing our net asset value, overseeing the preparation and filing of our tax returns and the printing and dissemination of reports to our stockholders, and generally overseeing the payment of our expenses and the performance of administrative and professional services rendered to us by others. For providing these services, facilities and personnel, we reimburse FSC, Inc. the allocable portion of overhead and other expenses incurred by FSC, Inc. in performing its obligations under the administration agreement, including rent and our allocable portion of the costs of compensation and related expenses of our chief financial officer and chief compliance officer, and their staff. FSC, Inc. has voluntarily determined to forgo receiving reimbursement for the services performed for us by our chief compliance officer, Bernard D. Berman, given his compensation arrangement with our investment adviser. However, although FSC, Inc. currently intends to forgo its right to receive such reimbursement, it is under no obligation to do so and may cease to do so at any time in the future. FSC, Inc. may also provide on our behalf managerial assistance to our portfolio companies. The administration agreement may be terminated by either party without penalty upon 60 days’ written notice to the other party.

 

The administration agreement provides that, absent willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of their respective duties or by reason of the reckless disregard of their respective duties and obligations, FSC, Inc. and its officers, managers, agents, employees, controlling persons, members and any other person or entity affiliated with it are entitled to indemnification from us for any damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and amounts reasonably paid in settlement) arising from the rendering of services under the administration agreement or otherwise as administrator for us.

 

License Agreement

 

We have also entered into a license agreement with Fifth Street Capital LLC pursuant to which Fifth Street Capital LLC has agreed to grant us a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use the name “Fifth Street.” Under this agreement, we will have a right to use the “Fifth Street” name, for so long as Fifth Street Management or one of its affiliates remains our investment adviser. Other than with respect to this limited license, we will have no legal right to the “Fifth Street” name.

 

Exchange Act Reports

 

We maintain a website at www.fifthstreetfinance.com . The information on our website is not incorporated by reference in this annual report on Form 10-K.

 

We make available on or through our website certain reports and amendments to those reports that we file with or furnish to the SEC in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). These include our annual reports on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and our current reports on Form 8-K. We make this information available on our website free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file the information with, or furnish it to, the SEC.

Regulation

 

Business Development Company Regulations

 

We have elected to be regulated as a business development company under the 1940 Act. The 1940 Act contains prohibitions and restrictions relating to transactions between business development companies and their affiliates, principal underwriters and affiliates of those affiliates or underwriters. The 1940 Act requires that a majority of the directors be persons other than “interested persons,” as that term is defined in the 1940 Act. In addition, the 1940 Act provides that we may not change the nature of our business so as to cease to be, or to withdraw our election as, a business development company unless approved by a majority of our outstanding voting securities.

 

The 1940 Act defines “a majority of the outstanding voting securities” as the lesser of (i) 67% or more of the voting securities present at a meeting if the holders of more than 50% of our outstanding voting securities are present or represented by proxy or (ii) more than 50% of our outstanding voting securities.

 

As a business development company, we will not generally be permitted to invest in any portfolio company in which our investment adviser or any of its affiliates currently have an investment or to make any co-investments with our investment adviser or its affiliates without an exemptive order from the SEC. We currently do not intend to apply for an exemptive order that would permit us to co-invest with vehicles managed by our investment adviser or its affiliates.

 

Qualifying Assets

 

Under the 1940 Act, a business development company may not acquire any asset other than assets of the type listed in Section 55(a) of the 1940 Act, which are referred to as qualifying assets, unless, at the time the acquisition is made, qualifying assets represent at least 70% of the company’s total assets. The principal categories of qualifying assets relevant to our business are any of the following:

 

(1) Securities purchased in transactions not involving any public offering from the issuer of such securities, which issuer (subject to certain limited exceptions) is an eligible portfolio company, or from any person who is, or has been during the preceding 13 months, an affiliated person of an eligible portfolio company, or from any other person, subject to such rules as may be prescribed by the SEC. An eligible portfolio company is defined in the 1940 Act as any issuer which:

 

(a) is organized under the laws of, and has its principal place of business in, the United States;

 

(b) is not an investment company (other than a small business investment company wholly owned by the business development company) or a company that would be an investment company but for certain exclusions under the 1940 Act; and

 

(c) satisfies any of the following:

 

(i) does not have any class of securities that is traded on a national securities exchange;

 

(ii) has a class of securities listed on a national securities exchange, but has an aggregate market value of outstanding voting and non-voting common equity of less than $250 million;

 

(iii) is controlled by a business development company or a group of companies including a business development company and the business development company has an affiliated person who is a director of the eligible portfolio company; or

 

(iv) is a small and solvent company having total assets of not more than $4 million and capital and surplus of not less than $2 million;

 

(2) Securities of any eligible portfolio company that we control;

 

(3) Securities purchased in a private transaction from a U.S. issuer that is not an investment company or from an affiliated person of the issuer, or in transactions incident thereto, if the issuer is in bankruptcy and subject to reorganization or if the issuer, immediately prior to the purchase of its

securities was unable to meet its obligations as they came due without material assistance other than conventional lending or financing arrangements;

 

(4) Securities of an eligible portfolio company purchased from any person in a private transaction if there is no ready market for such securities and we already own 60% of the outstanding equity of the eligible portfolio company;

 

(5) Securities received in exchange for or distributed on or with respect to securities described in (1) through (4) above, or pursuant to the exercise of warrants or rights relating to such securities; or

 

(6) Cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities or high-quality debt securities maturing in one year or less from the time of investment.

 

In addition, a business development company must be operated for the purpose of making investments in the types of securities described in (1), (2) or (3) above.

 

Managerial Assistance to Portfolio Companies

 

In order to count portfolio securities as qualifying assets for the purpose of the 70% test, we must either control the issuer of the securities or must offer to make available to the issuer of the securities (other than small and solvent companies described above) significant managerial assistance; except that, where we purchase such securities in conjunction with one or more other persons acting together, one of the other persons in the group may make available such managerial assistance. Making available managerial assistance means, among other things, any arrangement whereby the business development company, through its directors, officers or employees, offers to provide, and, if accepted, does so provide, significant guidance and counsel concerning the management, operations or business objectives and policies of a portfolio company.

 

Temporary Investments

 

Pending investment in other types of “qualifying assets,” as described above, our investments may consist of cash, cash equivalents, U.S. government securities or high-quality debt securities maturing in one year or less from the time of investment, which we refer to, collectively, as temporary investments, so that 70% of our assets are qualifying assets. Typically, we will invest in U.S. Treasury bills or in repurchase agreements, provided that such agreements are fully collateralized by cash or securities issued by the U.S. government or its agencies. A repurchase agreement (which is substantially similar to a secured loan) involves the purchase by an investor, such as us, of a specified security and the simultaneous agreement by the seller to repurchase it at an agreed-upon future date and at a price that is greater than the purchase price by an amount that reflects an agreed-upon interest rate. There is no percentage restriction on the proportion of our assets that may be invested in such repurchase agreements. However, if more than 25% of our total assets constitute repurchase agreements from a single counterparty, we would not meet the diversification tests in order to qualify as a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Thus, we do not intend to enter into repurchase agreements with a single counterparty in excess of this limit. Our investment adviser will monitor the creditworthiness of the counterparties with which we enter into repurchase agreement transactions.

 

Senior Securities

 

We are permitted, under specified conditions, to issue multiple classes of debt and one class of stock senior to our common stock if our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, is at least equal to 200% immediately after each such issuance. In addition, while any senior securities remain outstanding, we may be prohibited from making distribution to our stockholders or repurchasing such securities or shares unless we meet the applicable asset coverage ratios at the time of the distribution or repurchase. We may also borrow amounts up to 5% of the value of our total assets for temporary or emergency purposes without regard to asset coverage. For a discussion of the risks associated with leverage, see “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure — Regulations governing our operation as a business development company and RIC affect our ability to raise, and the way in which we raise, additional capital or borrow for investment purposes,

which may have a negative effect on our growth” and “— Because we borrow money, the potential for loss on amounts invested in us will be magnified and may increase the risk of investing in us.”

 

Common Stock

 

We are not generally able to issue and sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share. We may, however, sell our common stock, warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below the current net asset value of the common stock if our Board of Directors determines that such sale is in our best interests and that of our stockholders, and our stockholders approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price which, in the determination of our Board of Directors, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any distributing commission or discount). We may also make rights offerings to our stockholders at prices per share less than the net asset value per share, subject to applicable requirements of the 1940 Act. See “Risk Factors — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure — Regulations governing our operation as a business development company affect our ability to raise, and the way in which we raise, additional capital or borrow for investment purposes, which may have a negative effect on our growth.”

 

Code of Ethics

 

We have adopted a code of ethics pursuant to Rule 17j-1 under the 1940 Act and we have also approved the investment adviser’s code of ethics that was adopted by it under Rule 17j-1 under the 1940 Act and Rule 204A-1 of the Advisers Act. These codes establish procedures for personal investments and restrict certain personal securities transactions. Personnel subject to the code may invest in securities for their personal investment accounts, including securities that may be purchased or held by us, so long as such investments are made in accordance with the code’s requirements. You may also read and copy the codes of ethics at the SEC’s Public Reference Room located at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. You may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. In addition, the codes of ethics are available on the EDGAR Database on the SEC’s Internet site at http://www.sec.gov.

 

Compliance Policies and Procedures

 

We and our investment adviser have adopted and implemented written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violation of the federal securities laws and are required to review these compliance policies and procedures annually for their adequacy and the effectiveness of their implementation. Our chief compliance officer is responsible for administering these policies and procedures.

 

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

 

We have delegated our proxy voting responsibility to our investment adviser. The proxy voting policies and procedures of our investment adviser are set forth below. The guidelines are reviewed periodically by our investment adviser and our non-interested directors, and, accordingly, are subject to change.

 

Introduction

 

As an investment adviser registered under the Advisers Act, our investment adviser has a fiduciary duty to act solely in the best interests of its clients. As part of this duty, it recognizes that it must vote client securities in a timely manner free of conflicts of interest and in the best interests of its clients.

 

These policies and procedures for voting proxies for the investment advisory clients of our investment adviser are intended to comply with Section 206 of, and Rule 206(4)-6 under, the Advisers Act.

 

Proxy policies

 

Our investment adviser will vote proxies relating to our securities in the best interest of our stockholders. It will review on a case-by-case basis each proposal submitted for a stockholder vote to determine its impact

on the portfolio securities held by us. Although our investment adviser will generally vote against proposals that may have a negative impact on our portfolio securities, it may vote for such a proposal if there exists compelling long-term reasons to do so.

 

The proxy voting decisions of our investment adviser are made by the senior officers who are responsible for monitoring each of our investments. To ensure that its vote is not the product of a conflict of interest, it will require that: (a) anyone involved in the decision making process disclose to its chief compliance officer any potential conflict that he or she is aware of and any contact that he or she has had with any interested party regarding a proxy vote; and (b) employees involved in the decision making process or vote administration are prohibited from revealing how our investment adviser intends to vote on a proposal in order to reduce any attempted influence from interested parties.

 

Proxy voting records

 

You may obtain information, without charge, regarding how we voted proxies with respect to our portfolio securities by making a written request for proxy voting information to: Chief Compliance Officer, 10 Bank Street, 12 ^th Floor, White Plains, NY 10606.

 

Other

 

We will be subject to periodic examination by the SEC for compliance with the 1940 Act.

 

We are required to provide and maintain a bond issued by a reputable fidelity insurance company to protect us against larceny and embezzlement. Furthermore, as a business development company, we are prohibited from protecting any director or officer against any liability to us or our stockholders arising from willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of such person’s office.

 

Exchange Act and Sarbanes-Oxley Act Compliance

 

We are subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements of the Exchange Act, including the filing of quarterly, annual and current reports, proxy statements and other required items. In addition, we are subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which imposes a wide variety of regulatory requirements on publicly-held companies and their insiders. For example:

 

 

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires us to review our current policies and procedures to determine whether we comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. We intend to monitor our compliance with all regulations that are adopted under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and will take actions necessary to ensure that we are in compliance therewith.

 

Small Business Investment Company Regulations

 

In August 2009, we formed Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners IV, L.P., a wholly-owned subsidiary of ours. In February 2010, Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners IV, L.P. received final approval to be licensed by the United States Small Business Administration, or SBA, as a small business investment company, or SBIC.

The SBIC license allows our SBIC subsidiary to obtain leverage by issuing SBA-guaranteed debentures, subject to the issuance of a capital commitment by the SBA and other customary procedures. SBA-guaranteed debentures are non-recourse, interest only debentures with interest payable semi-annually and have a ten year maturity. The principal amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures is not required to be paid prior to maturity but may be prepaid at any time without penalty. The interest rate of SBA-guaranteed debentures is fixed on a semi-annual basis at a market-driven spread over U.S. Treasury Notes with 10-year maturities.

 

SBICs are designed to stimulate the flow of private equity capital to eligible small businesses. Under SBA regulations, SBICs may make loans to eligible small businesses and invest in the equity securities of small businesses. Under present SBA regulations, eligible small businesses include businesses that have a tangible net worth not exceeding $18 million and have average annual fully taxed net income not exceeding $6 million for the two most recent fiscal years. In addition, an SBIC must devote 25% of its investment activity to “smaller” concerns as defined by the SBA. A smaller concern is one that has a tangible net worth not exceeding $6 million and has average annual fully taxed net income not exceeding $2 million for the two most recent fiscal years. SBA regulations also provide alternative size standard criteria to determine eligibility, which depend on the industry in which the business is engaged and are based on such factors as the number of employees and gross sales. According to SBA regulations, SBICs may make long-term loans to small businesses, invest in the equity securities of such businesses and provide them with consulting and advisory services.

 

SBA regulations currently limit the amount that our SBIC subsidiary may borrow up to a maximum of $150 million when it has at least $75 million in regulatory capital, receives a capital commitment from the SBA and has been through an examination by the SBA subsequent to licensing. As of September 30, 2010, our SBIC subsidiary had $75 million in regulatory capital and the SBA had issued a capital commitment to our SBIC subsidiary in the amount of $150 million.

 

The SBA restricts the ability of SBICs to repurchase their capital stock. SBA regulations also include restrictions on a “change of control” or transfer of an SBIC and require that SBICs invest idle funds in accordance with SBA regulations. In addition, our SBIC subsidiary may also be limited in its ability to make distributions to us if it does not have sufficient capital, in accordance with SBA regulations.

 

Our SBIC subsidiary is subject to regulation and oversight by the SBA, including requirements with respect to maintaining certain minimum financial ratios and other covenants. Receipt of an SBIC license does not assure that our SBIC subsidiary will receive SBA guaranteed debenture funding, which is dependent upon our SBIC subsidiary continuing to be in compliance with SBA regulations and policies. The SBA, as a creditor, will have a superior claim to our SBIC subsidiary’s assets over our stockholders in the event we liquidate our SBIC subsidiary or the SBA exercises its remedies under the SBA-guaranteed debentures issued by our SBIC subsidiary upon an event of default.

 

The New York Stock Exchange Corporate Governance Regulations

 

The New York Stock Exchange has adopted corporate governance regulations that listed companies must comply with. We are in compliance with such corporate governance listing standards applicable to business development companies.

 

Taxation as a Regulated Investment Company

 

As a business development company, we have elected to be treated, and intend to qualify annually, as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code, beginning with our 2008 taxable year. As a RIC, we generally will not have to pay corporate-level U.S. federal income taxes on any income that we distribute to our stockholders as dividends. To continue to qualify as a RIC, we must, among other things, meet certain source-of-income and asset diversification requirements (as described below). In addition, to qualify for RIC tax treatment we must distribute to our stockholders, for each taxable year, at least 90% of our “investment company taxable income,” which is generally our ordinary income plus the excess of our realized net short-term capital gains over our realized net long-term capital losses (the “Annual Distribution Requirement”).

If we:

 

 

then we will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the portion of our income we distribute (or are deemed to distribute) to stockholders. We will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at the regular corporate rates on any income or capital gains not distributed (or deemed distributed) to our stockholders.

 

We will be subject to a 4% nondeductible U.S. federal excise tax on certain undistributed income unless we distribute in a timely manner an amount at least equal to the sum of (1) 98% of our net ordinary income for each calendar year, (2) 98% of our capital gain net income for the one-year period ending October 31 in that calendar year and (3) any income recognized, but not distributed, in preceding years (the “Excise Tax Avoidance Requirement”). We generally will endeavor in each taxable year to make sufficient distributions to our stockholders to avoid any U.S. federal excise tax on our earnings.

 

In order to qualify as a RIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must, among other things:

 

 

 

We may be required to recognize taxable income in circumstances in which we do not receive cash. For example, if we hold debt obligations that are treated under applicable tax rules as having original issue discount (such as debt instruments with PIK interest or, in certain cases, increasing interest rates or issued with warrants), we must include in income each year a portion of the original issue discount that accrues over the life of the obligation, regardless of whether cash representing such income is received by us in the same taxable year. We may also have to include in income other amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as PIK interest and deferred loan origination fees that are paid after origination of the loan or are paid in non-cash compensation such as warrants or stock. Because any original issue discount or other amounts accrued will be included in our investment company taxable income for the year of accrual, we may be required to make a distribution to our stockholders in order to satisfy the Annual Distribution Requirement, even though we will not have received any corresponding cash amount.

 

Although we do not presently expect to do so, we are authorized to borrow funds and to sell assets in order to satisfy distribution requirements. However, under the 1940 Act, we are not permitted in certain circumstances to make distributions to our stockholders while our debt obligations and other senior securities are outstanding unless certain “asset coverage” tests are met. Moreover, our ability to dispose of assets to meet our distribution requirements may be limited by (1) the illiquid nature of our portfolio and/or (2) other requirements relating to our status as a RIC, including the Diversification Tests. If we dispose of assets in

order to meet the Annual Distribution Requirement or the Excise Tax Avoidance Requirement, we may make such dispositions at times that, from an investment standpoint, are not advantageous.

 

Pursuant to a recent revenue procedure (Revenue Procedure 2010-12) issued by the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, the IRS has indicated that it will treat distributions from certain publicly traded RICs (including business development companies) that are paid part in cash and part in stock as dividends that would satisfy the RIC’s annual distribution requirements and qualify for the dividends paid deduction for federal income tax purposes. In order to qualify for such treatment, the revenue procedure requires that at least 10% of the total distribution be payable in cash and that each stockholder have a right to elect to receive its entire distribution in cash. If too many stockholders elect to receive cash, each stockholder electing to receive cash must receive a proportionate share of the cash to be distributed (although no stockholder electing to receive cash may receive less than 10% of such stockholder’s distribution in cash). This revenue procedure applies to distributions declared on or before December 31, 2012 with respect to taxable years ending on or before December 31, 2011. We do not currently intend to pay dividends in shares of our common stock pursuant to the revenue procedure any time in the near future.

 

Economic recessions or downturns could impair the ability of our portfolio companies to repay loans, which, in turn, could increase our non-performing assets, decrease the value of our portfolio, reduce our volume of new loans and harm our operating results, which would have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Many of our portfolio companies are and may be susceptible to economic slowdowns or recessions and may be unable to repay our loans during such periods. Therefore, our non-performing assets are likely to increase and the value of our portfolio is likely to decrease during such periods. Adverse economic conditions also may decrease the value of collateral securing some of our loans and the value of our equity investments. In this regard, as a result of recent economic conditions and their impact on certain of our portfolio companies, we have agreed to modify the payment terms of our investments in eleven of our portfolio companies as of September 30, 2010. Such modified terms include changes in payment-in-kind interest provisions and/or cash interest rates. These modifications, and any future modifications to our loan agreements as a result of the recent economic conditions or otherwise, may limit the amount of interest income that we recognize from the modified investments, which may, in turn, limit our ability to make distributions to our stockholders and have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure

 

Changes in interest rates may affect our cost of capital and net investment income.

 

Because we may borrow to fund our investments, a portion of our net investment income may be dependent upon the difference between the interest rate at which we borrow funds and the interest rate at which we invest these funds. A portion of our investments will have fixed interest rates, while a portion of our borrowings will likely have floating interest rates. As a result, a significant change in market interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our net investment income. In periods of rising interest rates, our cost of funds could increase, which would reduce our net investment income. We may hedge against such interest rate fluctuations by using standard hedging instruments such as interest rate swap agreements, futures, options and forward contracts, subject to applicable legal requirements, including without limitation, all necessary registrations (or exemptions from registration) with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. These activities may limit our ability to participate in the benefits of lower interest rates with respect to the hedged borrowings. Adverse developments resulting from changes in interest rates or hedging transactions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

We have a limited operating history.

 

Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners III, L.P. commenced operations on February 15, 2007. On January 2, 2008, Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners III, L.P. merged with and into Fifth Street Finance Corp., a Delaware corporation. As a result, we are subject to all of the business risks and uncertainties associated with any new business, including the risk that we will not achieve our investment objective and that the value of our common stock could decline substantially.

 

We currently have a limited number of investments in our investment portfolio. As a result, a loss on one or more of those investments would have a more adverse effect on our company than the effect such a loss would have on a company with a larger and more diverse investment portfolio.

 

As a company with a limited operating history, we have not had the opportunity to invest in a large number of portfolio companies. As a result, until we have increased the number of investments in our investment portfolio, a loss on one or more of our investments would affect us more adversely than such loss would affect a company with a larger and more diverse investment portfolio.

A significant portion of our investment portfolio is and will continue to be recorded at fair value as determined in good faith by our Board of Directors and, as a result, there is and will continue to be uncertainty as to the value of our portfolio investments.

 

Under the 1940 Act, we are required to carry our portfolio investments at market value or, if there is no readily available market value, at fair value as determined by our Board of Directors. Typically, there is not a public market for the securities of the privately held companies in which we have invested and will generally continue to invest. As a result, we value these securities quarterly at fair value as determined in good faith by our Board of Directors.

 

Certain factors that may be considered in determining the fair value of our investments include the nature and realizable value of any collateral, the portfolio company’s earnings and its ability to make payments on its indebtedness, the markets in which the portfolio company does business, comparison to comparable publicly-traded companies, discounted cash flow and other relevant factors. Because such valuations, and particularly valuations of private securities and private companies, are inherently uncertain, may fluctuate over short periods of time and may be based on estimates, our determinations of fair value may differ materially from the values that would have been used if a ready market for these securities existed. Due to this uncertainty, our fair value determinations may cause our net asset value on a given date to materially understate or overstate the value that we may ultimately realize upon the sale of one or more of our investments. As a result, investors purchasing our common stock based on an overstated net asset value would pay a higher price than the realizable value of our investments might warrant.

 

Our ability to achieve our investment objective depends on our investment adviser’s ability to support our investment process; if our investment adviser were to lose any of its principals, our ability to achieve our investment objective could be significantly harmed.

 

As discussed above, we were organized on February 15, 2007. We have no employees and, as a result, we depend on the investment expertise, skill and network of business contacts of the principals of our investment adviser. The principals of our investment adviser evaluate, negotiate, structure, execute, monitor and service our investments. Our future success will depend to a significant extent on the continued service and coordination of the principals of our investment adviser. The departure of any of these individuals could have a material adverse effect on our ability to achieve our investment objective.

 

Our ability to achieve our investment objective depends on our investment adviser’s ability to identify, analyze, invest in, finance and monitor companies that meet our investment criteria. Our investment adviser’s capabilities in structuring the investment process, providing competent, attentive and efficient services to us, and facilitating access to financing on acceptable terms depend on the employment of investment professionals in adequate number and of adequate sophistication to match the corresponding flow of transactions. To achieve our investment objective, our investment adviser may need to hire, train, supervise and manage new investment professionals to participate in our investment selection and monitoring process. Our investment adviser may not be able to find investment professionals in a timely manner or at all. Failure to support our investment process could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Our investment adviser has no prior experience managing a business development company or a RIC.

 

The 1940 Act and the Code impose numerous constraints on the operations of business development companies and RICs that do not apply to the other investment vehicles previously managed by the principals of our investment adviser. For example, under the 1940 Act, business development companies are required to invest at least 70% of their total assets primarily in securities of qualifying U.S. private or thinly traded companies. Moreover, qualification for taxation as a RIC under subchapter M of the Code requires satisfaction of source-of-income and diversification requirements and our ability to avoid corporate-level taxes on our income and gains depends on our satisfaction of distribution requirements. The failure to comply with these provisions in a timely manner could prevent us from qualifying as a business development company or RIC or could force us to pay unexpected taxes and penalties, which could be material. Our investment adviser does

not have any prior experience managing a business development company or RIC. Its lack of experience in managing a portfolio of assets under such constraints may hinder its ability to take advantage of attractive investment opportunities and, as a result, achieve our investment objective.

 

Our business model depends to a significant extent upon strong referral relationships with private equity sponsors, and the inability of the principals of our investment adviser to maintain or develop these relationships, or the failure of these relationships to generate investment opportunities, could adversely affect our business.

 

We expect that the principals of our investment adviser will maintain and develop their relationships with private equity sponsors, and we will rely to a significant extent upon these relationships to provide us with potential investment opportunities. If the principals of our investment adviser fail to maintain their existing relationships or develop new relationships with other sponsors or sources of investment opportunities, we will not be able to grow our investment portfolio. In addition, individuals with whom the principals of our investment adviser have relationships are not obligated to provide us with investment opportunities, and, therefore, there is no assurance that such relationships will generate investment opportunities for us.

 

We may face increasing competition for investment opportunities, which could reduce returns and result in losses.

 

We compete for investments with other business development companies and investment funds (including private equity funds and mezzanine funds), as well as traditional financial services companies such as commercial banks and other sources of funding. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. For example, some competitors may have a lower cost of capital and access to funding sources that are not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments than we have. These characteristics could allow our competitors to consider a wider variety of investments, establish more relationships and offer better pricing and more flexible structuring than we are able to do. We may lose investment opportunities if we do not match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure. If we are forced to match our competitors’ pricing, terms and structure, we may not be able to achieve acceptable returns on our investments or may bear substantial risk of capital loss. A significant part of our competitive advantage stems from the fact that the market for investments in small and mid-sized companies is underserved by traditional commercial banks and other financial sources. A significant increase in the number and/or the size of our competitors in this target market could force us to accept less attractive investment terms. Furthermore, many of our competitors have greater experience operating under, or are not subject to, the regulatory restrictions that the 1940 Act imposes on us as a business development company.

 

Our incentive fee may induce our investment adviser to make speculative investments.

 

The incentive fee payable by us to our investment adviser may create an incentive for it to make investments on our behalf that are risky or more speculative than would be the case in the absence of such compensation arrangement, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during cyclical economic downturns. The way in which the incentive fee payable to our investment adviser is determined, which is calculated separately in two components as a percentage of the income (subject to a hurdle rate) and as a percentage of the realized gain on invested capital, may encourage our investment adviser to use leverage to increase the return on our investments or otherwise manipulate our income so as to recognize income in quarters where the hurdle rate is exceeded. Under certain circumstances, the use of leverage may increase the likelihood of default, which would disfavor the holders of our common stock.

 

The incentive fee payable by us to our investment adviser also may create an incentive for our investment adviser to invest on our behalf in instruments that have a deferred interest feature. Under these investments, we would accrue the interest over the life of the investment but would not receive the cash income from the investment until the end of the investment’s term, if at all. Our net investment income used to calculate the income portion of our incentive fee, however, includes accrued interest. Thus, a portion of the incentive fee would be based on income that we have not yet received in cash and may never receive in cash if the portfolio

company is unable to satisfy such interest payment obligation to us. Consequently, while we may make incentive fee payments on income accruals that we may not collect in the future and with respect to which we do not have a formal “claw back” right against our investment adviser per se, the amount of accrued income written off in any period will reduce the income in the period in which such write-off was taken and thereby reduce such period’s incentive fee payment.

 

In addition, our investment adviser receives the incentive fee based, in part, upon net capital gains realized on our investments. Unlike the portion of the incentive fee based on income, there is no performance threshold applicable to the portion of the incentive fee based on net capital gains. As a result, our investment adviser may have a tendency to invest more in investments that are likely to result in capital gains as compared to income producing securities. Such a practice could result in our investing in more speculative securities than would otherwise be the case, which could result in higher investment losses, particularly during economic downturns.

 

Given the subjective nature of the investment decisions made by our investment adviser on our behalf, we will be unable to monitor these potential conflicts of interest between us and our investment adviser.

 

Our base management fee may induce our investment adviser to incur leverage.

 

The fact that our base management fee is payable based upon our gross assets, which would include any borrowings for investment purposes, may encourage our investment adviser to use leverage to make additional investments. Under certain circumstances, the use of increased leverage may increase the likelihood of default, which would disfavor holders of our common stock. Given the subjective nature of the investment decisions made by our investment adviser on our behalf, we will not be able to monitor this potential conflict of interest.

 

Because we borrow money, the potential for loss on amounts invested in us will be magnified and may increase the risk of investing in us.

 

Borrowings, also known as leverage, magnify the potential for loss on invested equity capital. If we continue to use leverage to partially finance our investments, through borrowings from banks and other lenders, you will experience increased risks of investing in our common stock. If the value of our assets decreases, leveraging would cause net asset value to decline more sharply than it otherwise would have had we not leveraged. Similarly, any decrease in our income would cause net income to decline more sharply than it would have had we not borrowed. Such a decline could negatively affect our ability to make common stock distribution payments. Leverage is generally considered a speculative investment technique.

 

Substantially all of our assets are subject to security interests under secured credit facilities and if we default on our obligations under the facilities, we may suffer adverse consequences, including the lenders foreclosing on our assets.

 

As of September 30, 2010, except for assets that were funded through our SBIC subsidiary, substantially all of our assets were pledged as collateral under our credit facilities. If we default on our obligations under these facilities, the lenders may have the right to foreclose upon and sell, or otherwise transfer, the collateral subject to their security interests. In such event, we may be forced to sell our investments to raise funds to repay our outstanding borrowings in order to avoid foreclosure and these forced sales may be at times and at prices we would not consider advantageous. Moreover, such deleveraging of our company could significantly impair our ability to effectively operate our business in the manner in which we have historically operated. As a result, we could be forced to curtail or cease new investment activities and lower or eliminate the dividends that we have historically paid to our stockholders.

 

In addition, if the lenders exercise their right to sell the assets pledged under our credit facilities, such sales may be completed at distressed sale prices, thereby diminishing or potentially eliminating the amount of cash available to us after repayment of the amounts outstanding under the credit facilities.

Because we intend to distribute between 90% and 100% of our income to our stockholders in connection with our election to be treated as a RIC, we will continue to need additional capital to finance our growth. If additional funds are unavailable or not available on favorable terms, our ability to grow will be impaired.

 

In order to qualify for the tax benefits available to RICs and to minimize corporate-level taxes, we intend to distribute to our stockholders between 90% and 100% of our annual taxable income, except that we may retain certain net capital gains for investment, and treat such amounts as deemed distributions to our stockholders. If we elect to treat any amounts as deemed distributions, we must pay income taxes at the corporate rate on such deemed distributions on behalf of our stockholders. As a result of these requirements, we will likely need to raise capital from other sources to grow our business. As a business development company, we generally are required to meet a coverage ratio of total assets, less liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, to total senior securities, which includes all of our borrowings and any outstanding preferred stock, of at least 200%. These requirements limit the amount that we may borrow. Because we will continue to need capital to grow our investment portfolio, these limitations may prevent us from incurring debt and require us to raise additional equity at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so.

 

While we expect to be able to borrow and to issue additional debt and equity securities, we cannot assure you that debt and equity financing will be available to us on favorable terms, or at all. Also, as a business development company, we generally are not permitted to issue equity securities priced below net asset value without stockholder approval. If additional funds are not available to us, we could be forced to curtail or cease new investment activities, and our net asset value and share price could decline.

 

Our ability to enter into transactions with our affiliates is restricted.

 

We are prohibited under the 1940 Act from participating in certain transactions with certain of our affiliates without the prior approval of the members of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. Any person that owns, directly or indirectly, 5% or more of our outstanding voting securities is our affiliate for purposes of the 1940 Act and we are generally prohibited from buying or selling any securities (other than our securities) from or to such affiliate, absent the prior approval of our independent directors. The 1940 Act also prohibits certain “joint” transactions with certain of our affiliates, which could include investments in the same portfolio company (whether at the same or different times), without prior approval of our independent directors and, in some cases, the SEC. If a person acquires more than 25% of our voting securities, we are prohibited from buying or selling any security (other than any security of which we are the issuer) from or to such person or certain of that person’s affiliates, or entering into prohibited joint transactions with such person, absent the prior approval of the SEC. Similar restrictions limit our ability to transact business with our officers or directors or their affiliates. As a result of these restrictions, we may be prohibited from buying or selling any security (other than any security of which we are the issuer) from or to any portfolio company of a private equity fund managed by our investment adviser without the prior approval of the SEC, which may limit the scope of investment opportunities that would otherwise be available to us.

 

There are significant potential conflicts of interest which could adversely impact our investment returns.

 

Our executive officers and directors, and certain members of our investment adviser, serve or may serve as officers, directors or principals of entities that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do or of investment funds managed by our affiliates. Accordingly, they may have obligations to investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which might not be in the best interests of us or our stockholders. For example, Mr. Tannenbaum, our chief executive officer and managing partner of our investment adviser, is the managing partner of Fifth Street Capital LLC, a private investment firm. Although the other investment funds managed by Fifth Street Capital LLC and its affiliates generally are fully committed and, other than follow-on investments in existing portfolio companies, are no longer making investments, in the future, the principals of our investment adviser may manage other funds which may from time to time have overlapping investment objectives with those of us and accordingly invest in, whether principally or secondarily, asset classes similar to those targeted by us. If this should occur, the principals of our investment adviser would face conflicts of

interest in the allocation of investment opportunities to us and such other funds. Although our investment professionals will endeavor to allocate investment opportunities in a fair and equitable manner, we and our common stockholders could be adversely affected in the event investment opportunities are allocated among us and other investment vehicles managed or sponsored by, or affiliated with, our executive officers, directors, and members of our investment adviser.

 

The incentive fee we pay to our investment adviser relating to capital gains may be effectively greater than 20%.

 

As a result of the operation of the cumulative method of calculating the capital gains portion of the incentive fee we pay to our investment adviser, the cumulative aggregate capital gains fee received by our investment adviser could be effectively greater than 20%, depending on the timing and extent of subsequent net realized capital losses or net unrealized depreciation. For additional information on this calculation, see the disclosure in footnote 2 to Example 2 under the caption “Item 1. Business — Investment Advisory Agreement — Management Fee — Incentive Fee.” We cannot predict whether, or to what extent, this payment calculation would affect your investment in our stock.

 

The involvement of our investment adviser’s investment professionals in our valuation process may create conflicts of interest.

 

Our portfolio investments are generally not in publicly traded securities. As a result, the values of these securities are not readily available. We value these securities at fair value as determined in good faith by our Board of Directors based upon the recommendation of the Valuation Committee of our Board of Directors. In connection with that determination, investment professionals from our investment adviser prepare portfolio company valuations based upon the most recent portfolio company financial statements available and projected financial results of each portfolio company. The participation of our investment adviser’s investment professionals in our valuation process could result in a conflict of interest as our investment adviser’s management fee is based, in part, on our gross assets.

 

A failure on our part to maintain our qualification as a business development company would significantly reduce our operating flexibility.

 

If we fail to continuously qualify as a business development company, we might be subject to regulation as a registered closed-end investment company under the 1940 Act, which would significantly decrease our operating flexibility. In addition, failure to comply with the requirements imposed on business development companies by the 1940 Act could cause the SEC to bring an enforcement action against us. For additional information on the qualification requirements of a business development company, see the disclosure under the caption “Item 1. Business — Regulation — Business Development Company Regulations.”

 

Regulations governing our operation as a business development company and RIC affect our ability to raise, and the way in which we raise, additional capital or borrow for investment purposes, which may have a negative effect on our growth.

 

As a result of the annual distribution requirement to qualify for tax free treatment at the corporate level on income and gains distributed to stockholders, we need to periodically access the capital markets to raise cash to fund new investments. We generally are not able to issue or sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share, which may be a disadvantage as compared with other public companies or private investment funds. We may, however, sell our common stock, or warrants, options or rights to acquire our common stock, at a price below the current net asset value of the common stock if our Board of Directors and independent directors determine that such sale is in our best interests and the best interests of our stockholders, and our stockholders as well as those stockholders that are not affiliated with us approve such sale. In any such case, the price at which our securities are to be issued and sold may not be less than a price that, in the determination of our Board of Directors, closely approximates the market value of such securities (less any underwriting commission or discount). If our common stock trades at a discount to net asset value, this restriction could adversely affect our ability to raise capital.

We also may make rights offerings to our stockholders at prices less than net asset value, subject to applicable requirements of the 1940 Act. If we raise additional funds by issuing more shares of our common stock or issuing senior securities convertible into, or exchangeable for, our common stock, the percentage ownership of our stockholders may decline at that time and such stockholders may experience dilution. Moreover, we can offer no assurance that we will be able to issue and sell additional equity securities in the future, on terms favorable to us or at all.

 

In addition, we may issue “senior securities,” including borrowing money from banks or other financial institutions only in amounts such that our asset coverage, as defined in the 1940 Act, equals at least 200% after such incurrence or issuance. Our ability to issue different types of securities is also limited. Compliance with these requirements may unfavorably limit our investment opportunities and reduce our ability in comparison to other companies to profit from favorable spreads between the rates at which we can borrow and the rates at which we can lend. As a business development company, therefore, we may need to issue equity more frequently than our privately owned competitors, which may lead to greater stockholder dilution.

 

We expect to continue to borrow for investment purposes. If the value of our assets declines, we may be unable to satisfy the asset coverage test, which could prohibit us from paying dividends and could prevent us from qualifying as a RIC. If we cannot satisfy the asset coverage test, we may be required to sell a portion of our investments and, depending on the nature of our debt financing, repay a portion of our indebtedness at a time when such sales may be disadvantageous.

 

In addition, we may in the future seek to securitize our portfolio securities to generate cash for funding new investments. To securitize loans, we would likely create a wholly-owned subsidiary and contribute a pool of loans to the subsidiary. We would then sell interests in the subsidiary on a non-recourse basis to purchasers and we would retain all or a portion of the equity in the subsidiary. An inability to successfully securitize our loan portfolio could limit our ability to grow our business or fully execute our business strategy and may decrease our earnings, if any. The securitization market is subject to changing market conditions and we may not be able to access this market when we would otherwise deem appropriate. Moreover, the successful securitization of our portfolio might expose us to losses as the residual investments in which we do not sell interests will tend to be those that are riskier and more apt to generate losses. The 1940 Act also may impose restrictions on the structure of any securitization.

 

Our SBIC subsidiary’s investment adviser has no prior experience managing an SBIC and any failure to comply with SBA regulations, resulting from our SBIC subsidiary’s investment adviser’s lack of experience or otherwise, could have an adverse effect on our operations.

 

On February 3, 2010, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners IV, L.P., received a license, effective February 1, 2010, from the SBA to operate as an SBIC under Section 301(c) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 and is regulated by the SBA. The SBIC license allows our SBIC subsidiary to obtain leverage by issuing SBA-guaranteed debentures, subject to the issuance of a capital commitment by the SBA and other customary procedures. The SBA places certain limitations on the financing terms of investments by SBICs in portfolio companies and prohibits SBICs from providing funds for certain purposes or to businesses in a few prohibited industries. Compliance with SBIC requirements may cause our SBIC subsidiary to forego attractive investment opportunities that are not permitted under SBA regulations.

 

Further, SBA regulations require that an SBIC be periodically examined and audited by the SBA to determine its compliance with the relevant SBA regulations. The SBA prohibits, without prior SBA approval, a “change of control” of an SBIC or transfers that would result in any person (or a group of persons acting in concert) owning 10% or more of a class of capital stock of an SBIC. If our SBIC subsidiary fails to comply with applicable SBA regulations, the SBA could, depending on the severity of the violation, limit or prohibit its use of debentures, declare outstanding debentures immediately due and payable, and/or limit it from making new investments. In addition, the SBA can revoke or suspend a license for willful or repeated violation of, or willful or repeated failure to observe, any provision of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 or any rule or regulation promulgated thereunder. These actions by the SBA would, in turn, negatively affect us because our SBIC subsidiary is our wholly-owned subsidiary. Our SBIC subsidiary’s investment adviser does

not have any prior experience managing an SBIC. Its lack of experience in complying with SBA regulations may hinder its ability to take advantage of our SBIC subsidiary’s access to SBA-guaranteed debentures.

 

Any failure to comply with SBA regulations could have an adverse effect on our operations.

 

We may experience fluctuations in our quarterly results.

 

We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results due to a number of factors, including our ability or inability to make investments in companies that meet our investment criteria, the interest rate payable on the debt securities we acquire, the level of our expenses, variations in and the timing of the recognition of realized and unrealized gains or losses, the degree to which we encounter competition in our market and general economic conditions. As a result of these factors, results for any period should not be relied upon as being indicative of performance in future periods.

 

Our Board of Directors may change our investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice or stockholder approval, the effects of which may be adverse.

 

Our Board of Directors has the authority to modify or waive our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies without prior notice and without stockholder approval. We cannot predict the effect any changes to our current investment objective, operating policies and strategies would have on our business, net asset value, operating results and value of our stock. However, the effects might be adverse, which could negatively impact our ability to pay you distributions and cause you to lose part or all of your investment.

 

We will be subject to corporate-level income tax if we are unable to maintain our qualification as a RIC under Subchapter M of the Code or do not satisfy the annual distribution requirement.

 

To maintain RIC status and be relieved of federal taxes on income and gains distributed to our stockholders, we must meet the following annual distribution, income source and asset diversification requirements.

 

 

If we fail to qualify for or maintain RIC status or to meet the annual distribution requirement for any reason and are subject to corporate income tax, the resulting corporate taxes could substantially reduce our net assets, the amount of income available for distribution and the amount of our distributions.

 

We may not be able to pay you distributions, our distributions may not grow over time and a portion of our distributions may be a return of capital.

 

We intend to pay distributions to our stockholders out of assets legally available for distribution. We cannot assure you that we will achieve investment results that will allow us to make a specified level of cash distributions or year-to-year increases in cash distributions. Our ability to pay distributions might be adversely affected by, among other things, the impact of one or more of the risk factors described in this annual report on Form 10-K. In addition, the inability to satisfy the asset coverage test applicable to us as a business development company can limit our ability to pay distributions. All distributions will be paid at the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on our earnings, our financial condition, maintenance of our RIC status, compliance with applicable business development company regulations and such other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant from time to time. We cannot assure you that we will pay distributions to our stockholders in the future.

 

When we make distributions, we will be required to determine the extent to which such distributions are paid out of current or accumulated earnings and profits. Distributions in excess of current and accumulated earnings and profits will be treated as a non-taxable return of capital to the extent of an investor’s basis in our stock and, assuming that an investor holds our stock as a capital asset, thereafter as a capital gain.

 

We may have difficulty paying our required distributions if we recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income.

 

For federal income tax purposes, we include in income certain amounts that we have not yet received in cash, such as original issue discount or accruals on a contingent payment debt instrument, which may occur if we receive warrants in connection with the origination of a loan or possibly in other circumstances. Such original issue discount is included in income before we receive any corresponding cash payments. We also may be required to include in income certain other amounts that we do not receive in cash.

 

Since, in certain cases, we may recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income, we may have difficulty meeting the annual distribution requirement necessary to be relieved of federal taxes on income and gains distributed to our stockholders. Accordingly, we may have to sell some of our investments at times and/or at prices we would not consider advantageous, raise additional debt or equity capital or forgo new investment opportunities for this purpose. If we are not able to obtain cash from other sources, we may fail to satisfy the annual distribution requirement and thus become subject to corporate-level income tax.

 

We may in the future choose to pay dividends in our own stock, in which case you may be required to pay tax in excess of the cash you receive.

 

We may distribute taxable dividends that are payable in part in our stock. Taxable stockholders receiving such dividends will be required to include the full amount of the dividend as ordinary income (or as long-term capital gain to the extent such distribution is properly designated as a capital gain dividend) to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits for United States federal income tax purposes. As a result, a U.S. stockholder may be required to pay tax with respect to such dividends in excess of any cash received. If a U.S. stockholder sells the stock it receives as a dividend in order to pay this tax, the sales proceeds may be less than the amount included in income with respect to the dividend, depending on the market price of our stock at the time of the sale. Furthermore, with respect to non-U.S. stockholders, we may be required to withhold U.S. tax with respect to such dividends, including in respect of all or a portion of such dividend that is payable in stock. In addition, if a significant number of our stockholders determine to sell shares of our stock in order to pay taxes owed on dividends, it may put downward pressure on the trading price of our stock.

In addition, as discussed elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K, our loans typically contain a payment-in-kind (“PIK”) interest provision. The PIK interest, computed at the contractual rate specified in each loan agreement, is added to the principal balance of the loan and recorded as interest income. To avoid the imposition of corporate-level tax on us, this non-cash source of income needs to be paid out to stockholders in cash distributions or, in the event that we determine to do so, in shares of our common stock, even though we have not yet collected and may never collect the cash relating to the PIK interest. As a result, if we distribute taxable dividends in the form of our common stock, we may have to distribute a stock dividend to account for PIK interest even though we have not yet collected the cash.

 

Our wholly-owned SBIC subsidiary may be unable to make distributions to us that will enable us to maintain RIC status, which could result in the imposition of an entity-level tax.

 

In order for us to continue to qualify for RIC tax treatment and to minimize corporate-level taxes, we are required to distribute substantially all of our net ordinary income and net capital gain income, including income from certain of our subsidiaries, which includes the income from our SBIC subsidiary. We are partially dependent on our SBIC subsidiary for cash distributions to enable us to meet the RIC distribution requirements. Our SBIC subsidiary may be limited by the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and SBA regulations governing SBICs, from making certain distributions to us that may be necessary to maintain our status as a RIC. We may have to request a waiver of the SBA’s restrictions for our SBIC subsidiary to make certain distributions to maintain our RIC status. We cannot assure you that the SBA will grant such waiver and if our SBIC subsidiary is unable to obtain a waiver, compliance with the SBA regulations may result in loss of RIC tax treatment and a consequent imposition of an entity-level tax on us.

 

Changes in laws or regulations governing our operations may adversely affect our business or cause us to alter our business strategy.

 

We and our portfolio companies are subject to regulation at the local, state and federal level. New legislation may be enacted or new interpretations, rulings or regulations could be adopted, including those governing the types of investments we are permitted to make or that impose limits on our ability to pledge a significant amount of our assets to secure loans, any of which could harm us and our stockholders, potentially with retroactive effect.

 

Additionally, any changes to the laws and regulations governing our operations relating to permitted investments may cause us to alter our investment strategy in order to avail ourselves of new or different opportunities. Such changes could result in material differences to the strategies and plans set forth in this annual report on Form 10-K and may result in our investment focus shifting from the areas of expertise of our investment adviser to other types of investments in which our investment adviser may have less expertise or little or no experience. Thus, any such changes, if they occur, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and the value of your investment.

 

We have identified deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting from time to time. Future control deficiencies could prevent us from accurately and timely reporting our financial results.

 

We have identified deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting from time to time, including significant deficiencies and material weaknesses. A “significant deficiency” is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those responsible for oversight of a company’s financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of a company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

 

Our failure to identify deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting in a timely manner or remediate any deficiencies, or the identification of material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in the future could prevent us from accurately and timely reporting our financial results.

Risks Relating to Our Investments

 

Our investments in portfolio companies may be risky, and we could lose all or part of our investment.

 

Investing in small and mid-sized companies involves a number of significant risks. Among other things, these companies:

 

 

In addition, in the course of providing significant managerial assistance to certain of our portfolio companies, certain of our officers and directors may serve as directors on the boards of such companies. To the extent that litigation arises out of our investments in these companies, our officers and directors may be named as defendants in such litigation, which could result in an expenditure of funds (through our indemnification of such officers and directors) and the diversion of management time and resources.

 

An investment strategy focused primarily on privately held companies presents certain challenges, including the lack of available information about these companies.

 

We invest primarily in privately held companies. Generally, little public information exists about these companies, including typically a lack of audited financial statements and ratings by third parties. We must therefore rely on the ability of our investment adviser to obtain adequate information to evaluate the potential risks of investing in these companies. These companies and their financial information may not be subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other rules that govern public companies. If we are unable to uncover all material information about these companies, we may not make a fully informed investment decision, and we may lose money on our investments. These factors could affect our investment returns.

 

If we make unsecured debt investments, we may lack adequate protection in the event our portfolio companies become distressed or insolvent and will likely experience a lower recovery than more senior debtholders in the event our portfolio companies defaults on their indebtedness.

 

We may make unsecured debt investments in portfolio companies in the future. Unsecured debt investments are unsecured and junior to other indebtedness of the portfolio company. As a consequence, the holder of an unsecured debt investment may lack adequate protection in the event the portfolio company becomes distressed or insolvent and will likely experience a lower recovery than more senior debtholders in the event the portfolio company defaults on its indebtedness. In addition, unsecured debt investments of small and mid-sized companies are often highly illiquid and in adverse market conditions may experience steep declines in valuation even if they are fully performing.

If we invest in the securities and obligations of distressed or bankrupt companies, such investments may be subject to significant risks, including lack of income, extraordinary expenses, uncertainty with respect to satisfaction of debt, lower-than expected investment values or income potentials and resale restrictions.

 

We are authorized to invest in the securities and other obligations of distressed or bankrupt companies. At times, distressed debt obligations may not produce income and may require us to bear certain extraordinary expenses (including legal, accounting, valuation and transaction expenses) in order to protect and recover our investment. Therefore, to the extent we invest in distressed debt, our ability to achieve current income for our stockholders may be diminished.

 

We also will be subject to significant uncertainty as to when and in what manner and for what value the distressed debt we invest in will eventually be satisfied (e.g., through a liquidation of the obligor’s assets, an exchange offer or plan of reorganization involving the distressed debt securities or a payment of some amount in satisfaction of the obligation). In addition, even if an exchange offer is made or plan of reorganization is adopted with respect to distressed debt held by us, there can be no assurance that the securities or other assets received by us in connection with such exchange offer or plan of reorganization will not have a lower value or income potential than may have been anticipated when the investment was made.

 

Moreover, any securities received by us upon completion of an exchange offer or plan of reorganization may be restricted as to resale. As a result of our participation in negotiations with respect to any exchange offer or plan of reorganization with respect to an issuer of distressed debt, we may be restricted from disposing of such securities.

 

The lack of liquidity in our investments may adversely affect our business.

 

We invest, and will continue to invest, in companies whose securities are not publicly traded, and whose securities will be subject to legal and other restrictions on resale or will otherwise be less liquid than publicly traded securities. In fact, all of our assets may be invested in illiquid securities. The illiquidity of these investments may make it difficult for us to sell these investments when desired. In addition, if we are required to liquidate all or a portion of our portfolio quickly, we may realize significantly less than the value at which we had previously recorded these investments. Our investments are usually subject to contractual or legal restrictions on resale or are otherwise illiquid because there is usually no established trading market for such investments. The illiquidity of most of our investments may make it difficult for us to dispose of them at a favorable price, and, as a result, we may suffer losses.

 

We may not have the funds or ability to make additional investments in our portfolio companies.

 

After our initial investment in a portfolio company, we may be called upon from time to time to provide additional funds to such company or have the opportunity to increase our investment through the exercise of a warrant to purchase common stock. There is no assurance that we will make, or will have sufficient funds to make, follow-on investments. Any decisions not to make a follow-on investment or any inability on our part to make such an investment may have a negative impact on a portfolio company in need of such an investment, may result in a missed opportunity for us to increase our participation in a successful operation or may reduce the expected yield on the investment.

 

Our portfolio companies may incur debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, our investments in such companies.

 

We invest primarily in first and second lien debt issued by small and mid-sized companies. Our portfolio companies may have, or may be permitted to incur, other debt that ranks equally with, or senior to, the debt in which we invest. By their terms, such debt instruments may entitle the holders to receive payments of interest or principal on or before the dates on which we are entitled to receive payments with respect to the debt instruments in which we invest. Also, in the event of insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of a portfolio company, holders of debt instruments ranking senior to our investment in that portfolio company would typically be entitled to receive payment in full before we receive any distribution. After repaying such senior creditors, such portfolio company may not have any remaining assets to use for

repaying its obligation to us. In the case of debt ranking equally with debt instruments in which we invest, we would have to share on an equal basis any distributions with other creditors holding such debt in the event of an insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or bankruptcy of the relevant portfolio company.

 

The disposition of our investments may result in contingent liabilities.

 

Most of our investments will involve private securities. In connection with the disposition of an investment in private securities, we may be required to make representations about the business and financial affairs of the portfolio company typical of those made in connection with the sale of a business. We may also be required to indemnify the purchasers of such investment to the extent that any such representations turn out to be inaccurate or with respect to certain potential liabilities. These arrangements may result in contingent liabilities that ultimately yield funding obligations that must be satisfied through our return of certain distributions previously made to us.

 

There may be circumstances where our debt investments could be subordinated to claims of other creditors or we could be subject to lender liability claims.

 

Even though we have structured some of our investments as senior loans, if one of our portfolio companies were to go bankrupt, depending on the facts and circumstances, including the extent to which we actually provided managerial assistance to that portfolio company, a bankruptcy court might recharacterize our debt investment and subordinate all or a portion of our claim to that of other creditors. We may also be subject to lender liability claims for actions taken by us with respect to a borrower’s business or instances where we exercise control over the borrower. It is possible that we could become subject to a lender’s liability claim, including as a result of actions taken in rendering significant managerial assistance.

 

Second priority liens on collateral securing loans that we make to our portfolio companies may be subject to control by senior creditors with first priority liens. If there is a default, the value of the collateral may not be sufficient to repay in full both the first priority creditors and us.

 

Certain loans that we make to portfolio companies will be secured on a second priority basis by the same collateral securing senior secured debt of such companies. The first priority liens on the collateral will secure the portfolio company’s obligations under any outstanding senior debt and may secure certain other future debt that may be permitted to be incurred by the company under the agreements governing the loans. The holders of obligations secured by the first priority liens on the collateral will generally control the liquidation of and be entitled to receive proceeds from any realization of the collateral to repay their obligations in full before us. In addition, the value of the collateral in the event of liquidation will depend on market and economic conditions, the availability of buyers and other factors. There can be no assurance that the proceeds, if any, from the sale or sales of all of the collateral would be sufficient to satisfy the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens after payment in full of all obligations secured by the first priority liens on the collateral. If such proceeds are not sufficient to repay amounts outstanding under the loan obligations secured by the second priority liens, then we, to the extent not repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the collateral, will only have an unsecured claim against the company’s remaining assets, if any.

 

The rights we may have with respect to the collateral securing the loans we make to our portfolio companies with senior debt outstanding may also be limited pursuant to the terms of one or more intercreditor agreements that we enter into with the holders of senior debt. Under such an intercreditor agreement, at any time that obligations that have the benefit of the first priority liens are outstanding, any of the following actions that may be taken with respect to the collateral will be at the direction of the holders of the obligations secured by the first priority liens: the ability to cause the commencement of enforcement proceedings against the collateral; the ability to control the conduct of such proceedings; the approval of amendments to collateral documents; releases of liens on the collateral; and waivers of past defaults under collateral documents. We may not have the ability to control or direct such actions, even if our rights are adversely affected.

We generally do not and will not control our portfolio companies.

 

We do not, and do not expect to, control most of our portfolio companies, even though we may have board representation or board observation rights, and our debt agreements may contain certain restrictive covenants. As a result, we are subject to the risk that a portfolio company in which we invest may make business decisions with which we disagree and the management of such company, as representatives of the holders of their common equity, may take risks or otherwise act in ways that do not serve our interests as a debt investor. Due to the lack of liquidity for our investments in non-traded companies, we may not be able to dispose of our interests in our portfolio companies as readily as we would like or at an appropriate valuation. As a result, a portfolio company may make decisions that could decrease the value of our portfolio holdings.

 

Defaults by our portfolio companies would harm our operating results.

 

A portfolio company’s failure to satisfy financial or operating covenants imposed by us or other lenders could lead to defaults and, potentially, termination of its loans and foreclosure on its secured assets, which could trigger cross-defaults under other agreements and jeopardize a portfolio company’s ability to meet its obligations under the debt or equity securities that we hold. We may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms, which may include the waiver of certain financial covenants, with a defaulting portfolio company.

 

We may not realize gains from our equity investments.

 

Certain investments that we have made in the past and may make in the future include warrants or other equity securities. In addition, we have made in the past and may make in the future direct equity investments in companies. Our goal is ultimately to realize gains upon our disposition of such equity interests. However, the equity interests we receive may not appreciate in value and, in fact, may decline in value. Accordingly, we may not be able to realize gains from our equity interests, and any gains that we do realize on the disposition of any equity interests may not be sufficient to offset any other losses we experience. We also may be unable to realize any value if a portfolio company does not have a liquidity event, such as a sale of the business, recapitalization or public offering, which would allow us to sell the underlying equity interests. We often seek puts or similar rights to give us the right to sell our equity securities back to the portfolio company issuer. We may be unable to exercise these puts rights for the consideration provided in our investment documents if the issuer is in financial distress.

 

We are subject to certain risks associated with foreign investments.

 

We may make investments in foreign companies. Investing in foreign companies may expose us to additional risks not typically associated with investing in U.S. companies. These risks include changes in foreign exchange rates, exchange control regulations, political and social instability, expropriation, imposition of foreign taxes, less liquid markets and less available information than is generally the case in the U.S., higher transaction costs, less government supervision of exchanges, brokers and issuers, less developed bankruptcy laws, difficulty in enforcing contractual obligations, lack of uniform accounting and auditing standards and greater price volatility.

 

Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to anticipate and effectively manage these and other risks. We cannot assure you that these and other factors will not have a material adverse effect on our business as a whole.

 

We may expose ourselves to risks if we engage in hedging transactions.

 

We have and may in the future enter into hedging transactions, which may expose us to risks associated with such transactions. We may utilize instruments such as forward contracts and interest rate swaps, caps, collars and floors to seek to hedge against fluctuations in the relative values of our portfolio positions and amounts due under our credit facilities from changes in market interest rates. Use of these hedging instruments may include counterparty credit risk. Utilizing such hedging instruments does not eliminate the possibility of fluctuations in the values of such positions and amounts due under our credit facilities or prevent losses if the

values of such positions decline. However, such hedging can establish other positions designed to gain from those same developments, thereby offsetting the decline in the value of such portfolio positions. Such hedging transactions may also limit the opportunity for gain if the values of the underlying portfolio positions should increase. Moreover, it may not be possible to hedge against an interest rate fluctuation that is so generally anticipated that we are not able to enter into a hedging transaction at an acceptable price.

 

The success of our hedging transactions will depend on our ability to correctly predict movements and interest rates. Therefore, while we may enter into such transactions to seek to reduce interest rate risks, unanticipated changes in interest rates may result in poorer overall investment performance than if we had not engaged in any such hedging transactions. In addition, the degree of correlation between price movements of the instruments used in a hedging strategy and price movements in the portfolio positions being hedged may vary. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, we may not seek to establish a perfect correlation between such hedging instruments and the portfolio holdings or credit facilities being hedged. Any such imperfect correlation may prevent us from achieving the intended hedge and expose us to risk of loss. See also “— Changes in interest rates may affect our cost of capital and net investment income.”

 

Risks Relating to Our Common Stock

 

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, may trade at a discount to their net asset value.

 

Shares of closed-end investment companies, including business development companies, may trade at a discount from net asset value. This characteristic of closed-end investment companies and business development companies is separate and distinct from the risk that our net asset value per share may decline. We cannot predict whether our common stock will trade at, above or below net asset value.

 

Investing in our common stock may involve an above average degree of risk.

 

The investments we make in accordance with our investment objective may result in a higher amount of risk than alternative investment options and a higher risk of volatility or loss of principal. Our investments in portfolio companies involve higher levels of risk, and therefore, an investment in our shares may not be suitable for someone with lower risk tolerance.

 

The market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly.

 

The market price and liquidity of the market for shares of our common stock may be significantly affected by numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control and may not be directly related to our operating performance. These factors include:

 

 

Certain provisions of our restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws as well as the Delaware General Corporation Law could deter takeover attempts and have an adverse impact on the price of our common stock.

 

Our restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws as well as the Delaware General Corporation Law contain provisions that may have the effect of discouraging a third party from making an acquisition proposal for us. These anti-takeover provisions may inhibit a change in control in circumstances that could give the holders of our common stock the opportunity to realize a premium over the market price for our common stock.

 

 

 

 

results that will permit the payment of any cash distributions and, if we issue senior securities, we may be prohibited from making distributions if doing so causes us to fail to maintain the asset coverage ratios stipulated by the 1940 Act or if distributions are limited by the terms of any of our borrowings. See “Item 1. Business — Regulation — Taxation as a Regulated Investment Company.”

 

We have adopted an “opt out” dividend reinvestment plan for our common stockholders. As a result, if we make a cash distribution, then stockholders’ cash distributions will be automatically reinvested in additional shares of our common stock, unless they specifically “opt out” of the dividend reinvestment plan so as to receive cash distributions.

 

Pursuant to a recent revenue procedure (Revenue Procedure 2010-12) issued by the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, the IRS has indicated that it will treat distributions from certain publicly traded RICs (including business development companies) that are paid part in cash and part in stock as dividends that would satisfy the RIC’s annual distribution requirements and qualify for the dividends paid deduction for federal income tax purposes. In order to qualify for such treatment, the revenue procedure requires that at least 10% of the total distribution be payable in cash and that each stockholder have a right to elect to receive its entire distribution in cash. If too many stockholders elect to receive cash, each stockholder electing to receive cash must receive a proportionate share of the cash to be distributed (although no stockholder electing to receive cash may receive less than 10% of such stockholder’s distribution in cash). This revenue procedure applies to distributions declared on or before December 31, 2012 with respect to taxable years ending on or before December 31, 2011. We do not currently intend to pay dividends in shares of our common stock pursuant to the revenue procedure any time in the near future.

 

The following table reflects the dividend distributions per share that our Board of Directors has declared and we have paid, including shares issued under our DRIP, on our common stock from October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2010:

 

Stock Performance Graph

 

The following graph compares the cumulative 27-month total return to shareholders on Fifth Street Finance Corp.’s common stock relative to the cumulative total returns of the NYSE Composite index, the NASDAQ Financial index and a customized peer group of six companies that includes the following investment companies, which have elected to be regulated as business development companies under the 1940 Act: Apollo Investment Corp., Ares Capital Corp., Blackrock Kelso Capital Corp., Gladstone Capital Corp., MCG Capital Corp. and MVC Capital Inc. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in the common stock of each company, in each index, and in the peer group was $100 on June 12, 2008 (the date our common stock began to trade on the NYSE Stock Market in connection with our initial public offering), assumes the reinvestment of all cash dividends prior to any tax effect, and tracks the investment through to September 30, 2010. The comparisons in the graph below are based on historical data and are not intended to forecast the possible future performance of our common stock.

 

Comparison of 27 Month Cumulative Total Stockholder Return*
Among Fifth Street Finance Corp., the NYSE Composite Index,
the NASDAQ Financial Index and a Peer Group

 

 

 

 

Open Market Stock Repurchase Program

 

In October 2008, our Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase program to acquire up to $8 million of our outstanding common stock. Stock repurchases under this program were made through the open market at times and were in such amounts as our management deemed appropriate. The stock repurchase program expired December 2009.

In October 2010, our Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase program to acquire up to $20 million of our outstanding common stock. Stock repurchases under this program are to be made through the open market at times and in such amounts as our management deems appropriate, provided it is below the most recently published net asset value per share. The stock repurchase program expires December 31, 2011 and may be limited or terminated by the Board of Directors at any time without prior notice.

 

 

 

The following discussion should be read in connection with our Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K.

 

Some of the statements in this annual report on Form 10-K constitute forward-looking statements because they relate to future events or our future performance or financial condition. The forward-looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 10-K may include statements as to:

 

 

In addition, words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “expect,” “project” and “intend” indicate a forward-looking statement, although not all forward-looking statements include these words. The forward-looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 10-K involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those implied or expressed in the forward-looking statements for any reason, including the factors set forth in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K. Other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially include but are not limited to:

 

 

We have based the forward-looking statements included in this annual report on Form 10-K on information available to us on the date of this annual report, and we assume no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. Although we undertake no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, you are advised to consult any additional disclosures that we may make directly to you or through reports that we in the future may file with the SEC, including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K.

 

Overview

 

We are a specialty finance company that lends to and invests in small and mid-sized companies in connection with investments by private equity sponsors. Our investment objective is to maximize our portfolio’s total return by generating current income from our debt investments and capital appreciation from our equity investments.

 

We were formed as a Delaware limited partnership (Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners III, L.P.) on February 15, 2007. Effective as of January 2, 2008, Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners III, L.P. merged with and into Fifth Street Finance Corp. At the time of the merger, all outstanding partnership interests in Fifth Street

Mezzanine Partners III, L.P. were exchanged for 12,480,972 shares of common stock in Fifth Street Finance Corp.

 

Our Consolidated Financial Statements prior to January 2, 2008 reflect our operations as a Delaware limited partnership (Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners III, L.P.) prior to our merger with and into a corporation (Fifth Street Finance Corp.).

 

On June 17, 2008, we completed an initial public offering of 10,000,000 shares of our common stock at the offering price of $14.12 per share. Our shares are listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “FSC.”

 

On July 21, 2009, we completed a follow-on public offering of 9,487,500 shares of our common stock, which included the underwriters’ exercise of their over-allotment option, at the offering price of $9.25 per share.

 

On September 25, 2009, we completed a follow-on public offering of 5,520,000 shares of our common stock, which included the underwriters’ exercise of their over-allotment option, at the offering price of $10.50 per share.

 

On January 27, 2010, we completed a follow-on public offering of 7,000,000 shares of our common stock, which did not include the underwriters’ exercise of their over-allotment option, at the offering price of $11.20 per share. On February 25, 2010, we sold 300,500 shares of our common stock at the offering price of $11.20 per share upon the underwriters’ exercise of their over-allotment option in connection with this offering.

 

On June 21, 2010, we completed a follow-on public offering of 9,200,000 shares of our common stock, which included the underwriters’ exercise of their over-allotment option, at the offering price of $11.50 per share.

 

Current Market Conditions

 

Since mid-2007, the global financial markets have been in a great deal of turmoil, experiencing stress, volatility, illiquidity, and disruption. This turmoil appears to have peaked in the fall of 2008, resulting in several major financial institutions becoming insolvent, being acquired, or receiving government assistance. While the turmoil in the financial markets appears to have abated somewhat, the global economy continues to experience economic uncertainty. Economic uncertainty impacts our business in many ways, including changing spreads, structures, and purchase multiples as well as the overall supply of investment capital.

 

Despite the economic uncertainty, our deal pipeline remains robust, with high quality transactions backed by private equity sponsors in small to mid-sized companies. As always, we remain cautious in selecting new investment opportunities, and will only deploy capital in deals which are consistent with our disciplined philosophy of pursuing superior risk-adjusted returns.

 

As evidenced by our recent investment activities, we expect to grow the business in part by increasing the average investment size when and where appropriate. At the same time, we expect to focus more on first lien transactions. We also expect to invest in more floating rate facilities, with rate floors, to protect against interest rate decreases.

 

Although we believe that we currently have sufficient capital available to fund investments, a prolonged period of market disruptions may cause us to reduce the volume of loans we originate and/or fund, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. In this regard, because our common stock has at times traded at a price below our then current net asset value per share and we are limited in our ability to sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share, we may be limited in our ability to raise equity capital.

Critical Accounting Policies

 

FASB Accounting Standards Codification

 

The issuance of FASB Accounting Standards Codification ^tm (the “Codification”) on July 1, 2009 (effective for interim or annual reporting periods ending after September 15, 2009), changes the way that U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) are referenced. Beginning on that date, the Codification officially became the single source of authoritative nongovernmental GAAP; however, SEC registrants must also consider rules, regulations, and interpretive guidance issued by the SEC or its staff. The switch affects the way companies refer to GAAP in financial statements and in their accounting policies. References to standards will consist solely of the number used in the Codification’s structural organization.

 

Consistent with the effective date of the Codification, financial statements for periods ending after September 15, 2009, refer to the Codification structure, not pre-Codification historical GAAP.

 

Basis of Presentation

 

Effective January 2, 2008, Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners III, L.P. (the “Partnership”), a Delaware limited partnership organized on February 15, 2007, merged with and into Fifth Street Finance Corp. The merger involved the exchange of shares between companies under common control. In accordance with the guidance on exchanges of shares between entities under common control, our results of operations and cash flows for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008 are presented as if the merger had occurred as of October 1, 2007. Accordingly, no adjustments were made to the carrying value of assets and liabilities (or the cost basis of investments) as a result of the merger. Prior to January 2, 2008, references to Fifth Street are to the Partnership. After January 2, 2008, references to Fifth Street, FSC, “we” or “our” are to Fifth Street Finance Corp., unless the context otherwise requires. Fifth Street’s financial results for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2007 refer to the Partnership.

 

The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions affecting amounts reported in the Consolidated Financial Statements. We have identified investment valuation and revenue recognition as our most critical accounting estimates. We continuously evaluate our estimates, including those related to the matters described below. These estimates are based on the information that is currently available to us and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results could differ materially from those estimates under different assumptions or conditions. A discussion of our critical accounting policies follows.

 

Investment Valuation

 

We are required to report our investments that are not publicly traded or for which current market values are not readily available at fair value. The fair value is deemed to be the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.

 

Under Accounting Standards Codification 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820”), which we adopted effective October 1, 2008, we perform detailed valuations of our debt and equity investments on an individual basis, using market based, income based, and bond yield approaches as appropriate. In general, we utilize a bond yield method for the majority of our investments, as long as it is appropriate. If, in our judgment, the bond yield approach is not appropriate, we may use the enterprise value approach, or, in certain cases, an alternative methodology potentially including an asset liquidation or expected recovery model.

 

Under the market approach, we estimate the enterprise value of the portfolio companies in which we invest. There is no one methodology to estimate enterprise value and, in fact, for any one portfolio company, enterprise value is best expressed as a range of fair values, from which we derive a single estimate of

enterprise value. To estimate the enterprise value of a portfolio company, we analyze various factors, including the portfolio company’s historical and projected financial results. Typically, private companies are valued based on multiples of EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization), cash flows, net income, revenues, or in limited cases, book value. We generally require portfolio companies to provide annual audited and quarterly and monthly unaudited financial statements, as well as annual projections for the upcoming fiscal year.

 

Under the income approach, we generally prepare and analyze discounted cash flow models based on our projections of the future free cash flows of the business. Under the bond yield approach, we use bond yield models to determine the present value of the future cash flow streams of our debt investments. We review various sources of transactional data, including private mergers and acquisitions involving debt investments with similar characteristics, and assess the information in the valuation process.

 

Under the bond yield approach, we use bond yield models to determine the present value of the future cash flow streams of our debt investments. We review various sources of transactional data, including private mergers and acquisitions involving debt investments with similar characteristics, and assess the information in the valuation process.

 

Our Board of Directors undertakes a multi-step valuation process each quarter in connection with determining the fair value of our investments:

 

 

The fair value of all of our investments at September 30, 2010, and September 30, 2009, was determined by our Board of Directors. Our Board of Directors is solely responsible for the valuation of our portfolio investments at fair value as determined in good faith pursuant to our valuation policy and our consistently applied valuation process.

 

Our Board of Directors has engaged independent valuation firms to provide us with valuation assistance. Upon completion of its process each quarter, the independent valuation firms provides us with a written report regarding the preliminary valuations of selected portfolio securities as of the close of such quarter. We will continue to engage independent valuation firms to provide us with assistance regarding our determination of

the fair value of selected portfolio securities each quarter; however, our Board of Directors is ultimately and solely responsible for determining the fair value of our investments in good faith.

 

The portions of our portfolio valued, as a percentage of the portfolio at fair value, by independent valuation firms by period were as follows:

 

 

 

 

Our $50 million credit facility with Bank of Montreal was terminated effective September 16, 2009. The facility required independent valuations for at least 90% of the portfolio on a quarterly basis. With the termination of this facility, this valuation test is no longer required. However, we still intend to have a portion of the portfolio valued by an independent third party on an quarterly basis, with a substantial portion being valued on an annual basis.

 

As of September 30, 2010 and September 30, 2009, approximately 86.5% and 72.0%, respectively, of our total assets represented investments in portfolio companies valued at fair value.

 

Revenue Recognition

 

Interest and Dividend Income

 

Interest income, adjusted for amortization of premium and accretion of original issue discount, is recorded on the accrual basis to the extent that such amounts are expected to be collected. We stop accruing interest on investments when it is determined that interest is no longer collectible. Distributions from portfolio companies are recorded as dividend income when the distribution is received.

 

Fee Income

 

We receive a variety of fees in the ordinary course of business. Certain fees, such as origination fees, are capitalized and amortized in accordance with ASC 310-20 Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs . In accordance with ASC 820, the net unearned fee income balance is netted against the cost and fair value of the respective investments. Other fees, such as servicing fees, are classified as fee income and recognized as they are earned on a monthly basis.

 

We have also structured exit fees across certain of our portfolio investments to be received upon the future exit of those investments. These fees are to be paid to us upon the sooner to occur of (i) a sale of the borrower or substantially all of the assets of the borrower, (ii) the maturity date of the loan, or (iii) the date when full prepayment of the loan occurs. Exit fees are fees which are earned and payable upon the exit of a debt security and, similar to a prepayment penalty, are not accrued or otherwise included in net

investment income until received. The receipt of such fees as well as the timing of our receipt of such fees are contingent upon a successful exit event for each of the investments.

 

Payment-in-Kind (PIK) Interest

 

Our loans typically contain a contractual PIK interest provision. The PIK interest, which represents contractually deferred interest added to the loan balance that is generally due at the end of the loan term, is generally recorded on the accrual basis to the extent such amounts are expected to be collected. We generally cease accruing PIK interest if there is insufficient value to support the accrual or if we do not expect the portfolio company to be able to pay all principal and interest due. Our decision to cease accruing PIK interest involves subjective judgments and determinations based on available information about a particular portfolio company, including whether the portfolio company is current with respect to its payment of principal and interest on its loans and debt securities; monthly and quarterly financial statements and financial projections for the portfolio company; our assessment of the portfolio company’s business development success, including product development, profitability and the portfolio company’s overall adherence to its business plan; information obtained by us in connection with periodic formal update interviews with the portfolio company’s management and, if appropriate, the private equity sponsor; and information about the general economic and market conditions in which the portfolio company operates. Based on this and other information, we determine whether to cease accruing PIK interest on a loan or debt security. Our determination to cease accruing PIK interest on a loan or debt security is generally made well before our full write-down of such loan or debt security. In addition, if it is subsequently determined that we will not be able to collect any previously accrued PIK interest, the fair value of our loans or debt securities would decline by the amount of such previously accrued, but uncollectible, PIK interest.

 

For a discussion of risks we are subject to as a result of our use of PIK interest in connection with our investments, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors — Risks Relating to Our Business and Structure — We may have difficulty paying our required distributions if we recognize income before or without receiving cash representing such income,” “— We may in the future choose to pay dividends in our own stock, in which case you may be required to pay tax in excess of the cash you receive” and “— Our incentive fee may induce our investment adviser to make speculative investments.” In addition, if it is subsequently determined that we will not be able to collect any previously accrued PIK interest, the fair value of our loans or debt securities would decline by the amount of such previously accrued, but uncollectible, PIK interest.

 

To maintain our status as a RIC, PIK income must be paid out to our stockholders in the form of dividends even though we have not yet collected the cash and may never collect the cash relating to the PIK interest. Accumulated PIK interest was $19.3 million and represented 3.4% of the fair value of our portfolio of investments as of September 30, 2010 and $12.1 million or 4.0% as of September 30, 2009. The net increase in loan balances as a result of contracted PIK arrangements are separately identified in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

 

Portfolio Composition

 

Our investments principally consist of loans, purchased equity investments and equity grants in privately-held companies. Our loans are typically secured by either a first or second lien on the assets of the portfolio company, generally have terms of up to six years (but an expected average life of between three and four years) and typically bear interest at fixed rates and, to a lesser extent, at floating rates. We are currently focusing our new debt origination efforts on first lien loans. We believe that the risk-adjusted returns from these loans are superior to second lien investments at this time and offer superior credit quality. However, we may choose to originate second lien and unsecured loans in the future.

A summary of the composition of our investment portfolio at cost and fair value as a percentage of total investments is shown in the following tables:

 

 

 

The industry composition of our portfolio at cost and fair value as a percentage of total investments were as follows:

 

Portfolio Asset Quality

 

We employ a grading system to assess and monitor the credit risk of our investment portfolio. We rate all investments on a scale from 1 to 5. The system is intended to reflect the performance of the borrower’s business, the collateral coverage of the loan, and other factors considered relevant to making a credit judgment.

 

 

The following table shows the distribution of our investments on the 1 to 5 investment rating scale at fair value, as of September 30, 2010 and September 30, 2009:

 

 

 

 

As a result of current economic conditions and their impact on certain of our portfolio companies, we have agreed to modify the payment terms of our investments in eleven of our portfolio companies as of September 30, 2010. Such modified terms include increased payment-in-kind interest provisions and/or reduced cash interest rates. These modifications, and any future modifications to our loan agreements as a result of the current economic conditions or otherwise, may limit the amount of interest income that we recognize from the modified investments, which may, in turn, limit our ability to make distributions to our stockholders.

 

Loans and Debt Securities on Non-Accrual Status

 

Five investments did not pay all of their scheduled monthly cash interest payments for the year ended September 30, 2010. As of September 30, 2010, we had also stopped accruing PIK interest and original issue discount (“OID”) on these five investments. As of September 30, 2009, we had stopped accruing PIK interest and OID on five investments, including two investments that had not paid their scheduled monthly cash interest payments. As of September 30, 2008, no investments were on non-accrual status.

The non-accrual status of our portfolio investments as of September 30, 2010, September 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008 was as follows:

 

 

Non-accrual interest amounts related to the above investments for the years ended September 30, 2010 September 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008 were as follows:

 

 

Discussion and Analysis of Results and Operations

 

increased for the year ended September 30, 2010 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2009 by $9.1 million, primarily as a result of increases in the base management fee, the incentive fee, interest expense, administrator expense, and other general and administrative expenses.

 

The increase in base management and incentive fees resulted from an increase in our total assets as reflected in the growth of the investment portfolio, offset partially by our investment adviser’s unilateral decision to waive $727,000 and $172,000 of the base management fee for the years ended September 30, 2010 and September 30, 2009, respectively.

 

Net Investment Income

 

As a result of the $20.7 million increase in total investment income as compared to the $9.1 million increase in total expenses, net investment income for the year ended September 30, 2010 reflected a $11.6 million, or 37.2%, increase compared to the year ended September 30, 2009.

 

Realized Gain (Loss) on Investments

 

Net realized gain (loss) on investments is the difference between the proceeds received from dispositions of portfolio investments and their stated costs. Realized losses may also be recorded in connection with our determination that certain investments are considered worthless securities and/or meet the conditions for loss recognition per the applicable tax rules.

 

During the year ended September 30, 2010, we recorded the following investment realization events:

 

 

During the year ended September 30, 2009, we exited our investment in American Hardwoods Industries, LLC and recorded a realized loss of $10.4 million, and recorded a $4.0 million realized loss on our investment in CPAC, Inc. in connection with our determination that the investment was permanently impaired based on, among other things, our analysis of changes in the portfolio company’s business operations and prospects.

 

Net Change in Unrealized Appreciation or Depreciation

 

Net unrealized appreciation or depreciation is the net change in the fair value of our investment portfolio during the reporting period, including the reversal of previously recorded unrealized appreciation or depreciation when gains or losses are realized.

During the year ended September 30, 2010, we recorded net unrealized depreciation of $1.8 million. This consisted of $19.1 million of net unrealized depreciation on debt investments and $0.8 million of net unrealized depreciation on interest rate swaps, offset by $17.6 million of reclassifications to realized losses and $0.5 million of net unrealized appreciation on equity investments. During the year ended September 30, 2009, we recorded net unrealized depreciation of $10.8 million. This consisted of $23.1 million of net unrealized depreciation on debt investments and $2.0 million of net unrealized depreciation on equity investments, offset by $14.3 million of reclassifications to realized losses.

 

Comparison of years ended September 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008

 

Total Investment Income

 

Total investment income for the years ended September 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008 was $49.8 million and $33.2 million, respectively. For the year ended September 30, 2009, this amount primarily consisted of $46.0 million of interest income from portfolio investments (which included $7.4 million of PIK interest), and $3.5 million of fee income. For the year ended September 30, 2008, this amount primarily consisted of $30.5 million of interest income from portfolio investments (which included $4.9 million of PIK interest), and $1.8 million of fee income.

 

The increase in our total investment income for the year ended September 30, 2009 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2008 was primarily attributable to a net increase of two debt investments in our portfolio in the year-over-year period, partially offset by debt repayments received during the same period.

 

Expenses

 

Expenses (net of the permanently waived portion of the base management fee) for the years ended September 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008 were $18.4 million and $13.1 million, respectively. Expenses increased for the year ended September 30, 2009 as compared to the year ended September 30, 2008 by $5.3 million, primarily as a result of increases in base management fee, incentive fees and other general and administrative expenses.

 

The increase in base management fee resulted from an increase in our total assets as reflected in the growth of the investment portfolio offset partially by our investment adviser’s unilateral decision to waive $172,000 of the base management fee for the year ended September 30, 2009. Incentive fees were implemented effective January 2, 2008 when Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners III, L.P. merged with and into Fifth Street Finance Corp., and reflect the growth of our net investment income before such fees.

 

Net Investment Income

 

As a result of the $16.6 million increase in total investment income as compared to the $5.3 million increase in total expenses, net investment income for the year ended September 30, 2009 reflected a $11.3 million, or 55.7%, increase compared to the year ended September 30, 2008.

 

Realized Gain (Loss) on Investments

 

Net realized gain (loss) on investments is the difference between the proceeds received from dispositions of portfolio investments and their stated costs. During the year ended September 30, 2009, we exited our investment in American Hardwoods Industries, LLC and recorded a realized loss of $10.4 million, and recorded a $4.0 million realized loss on our investment in CPAC, Inc. in connection with our determination that the investment was permanently impaired based on, among other things, our analysis of changes in the portfolio company’s business operations and prospects. During the year ended September 30, 2008, we sold our equity investment in Filet of Chicken and realized a gain of $62,000.

 

Net Change in Unrealized Appreciation or Depreciation

 

Net unrealized appreciation or depreciation is the net change in the fair value of our investment portfolio during the reporting period, including the reversal of previously recorded unrealized appreciation or

depreciation when gains or losses are realized. During the year ended September 30, 2009, we recorded net unrealized depreciation of $10.8 million. This consisted of $23.1 million of net unrealized depreciation on debt investments and $2.0 million of net unrealized depreciation on equity investments, offset by $14.3 million of reclassifications to realized losses. During the year ended September 30, 2008, we recorded net unrealized depreciation of $16.9 million. This consisted of $12.1 million of net unrealized depreciation on debt investments and $4.8 million of net unrealized depreciation on equity investments.

 

we may also securitize a portion of our investments in first and second lien senior loans or unsecured debt or other assets. To securitize loans, we would likely create a wholly-owned subsidiary and contribute a pool of loans to the subsidiary. We would then sell interests in the subsidiary on a non-recourse basis to purchasers and we would retain all or a portion of the equity in the subsidiary. Our primary use of funds is investments in our targeted asset classes and cash distributions to holders of our common stock.

 

Although we expect to fund the growth of our investment portfolio through the net proceeds from future equity offerings, including our dividend reinvestment plan, and issuances of senior securities or future borrowings, to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act, our plans to raise capital may not be successful. In this regard, because our common stock has at times traded at a price below our then-current net asset value per share and we are limited in our ability to sell our common stock at a price below net asset value per share, we may be limited in our ability to raise equity capital.

 

In addition, we intend to distribute between 90% and 100% of our taxable income to our stockholders in order to satisfy the requirements applicable to RICs under Subchapter M of the Code. See “Regulated Investment Company Status and Distributions” below. Consequently, we may not have the funds or the ability to fund new investments, to make additional investments in our portfolio companies, to fund our unfunded commitments to portfolio companies or to repay borrowings. In addition, the illiquidity of our portfolio investments may make it difficult for us to sell these investments when desired and, if we are required to sell these investments, we may realize significantly less than their recorded value.

 

Also, as a business development company, we generally are required to meet a coverage ratio of total assets, less liabilities and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, to total senior securities, which include all of our borrowings and any outstanding preferred stock, of at least 200%. This requirement limits the amount that we may borrow. As of September 30, 2010, we were in compliance with this requirement. To fund growth in our investment portfolio in the future, we anticipate needing to raise additional capital from various sources, including the equity markets and the securitization or other debt-related markets, which may or may not be available on favorable terms, if at all.

 

Finally, in light of the conditions in the financial markets and the U.S. economy overall, we, through a wholly-owned subsidiary, sought and obtained a license from the SBA to operate an SBIC.

 

In this regard, on February 3, 2010, our wholly-owned subsidiary, Fifth Street Mezzanine Partners IV, L.P., received a license, effective February 1, 2010, from the SBA to operate as an SBIC under Section 301(c) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958. SBICs are designated to stimulate the flow of private equity capital to eligible small businesses. Under SBA regulations, SBICs may make loans to eligible small businesses and invest in the equity securities of small businesses.

 

The SBIC license allows our SBIC subsidiary to obtain leverage by issuing SBA-guaranteed debentures, subject to the issuance of a capital commitment by the SBA and other customary procedures. SBA-guaranteed debentures are non-recourse, interest only debentures with interest payable semi-annually and have a ten year maturity. The principal amount of SBA-guaranteed debentures is not required to be paid prior to maturity but may be prepaid at any time without penalty. The interest rate of SBA-guaranteed debentures is fixed on a semi-annual basis at a market-driven spread over U.S. Treasury Notes with 10-year maturities.

 

SBA regulations currently limit the amount that our SBIC subsidiary may borrow to a maximum of $150 million when it has at least $75 million in regulatory capital, receives a capital commitment from the SBA and has been through an examination by the SBA subsequent to licensing. As of September 30, 2010, our SBIC subsidiary had $75 million in regulatory capital. The SBA has issued a capital commitment to our SBIC subsidiary in the amount of $150 million, and $73 million of SBA debentures were outstanding as of September 30, 2010 that bore an interest rate of 3.50%, including the SBA annual charge of 0.285%.

 

We applied for exemptive relief from the SEC on September 9, 2009 and filed an amended application on February 8, 2010 to permit us to exclude the debt of our SBIC subsidiary guaranteed by the SBA from our 200% asset coverage test under the 1940 Act. If we receive an exemption for this SBA debt, we would have increased flexibility under the 200% asset coverage test.

Significant capital transactions that occurred from October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2010

 

The following table reflects the dividend distributions per share that our Board of Directors has declared and we have paid, including shares issued under our DRIP, on our common stock from October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2010:

 

 

The following table reflects shareholder transactions that occurred from October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2010:

 

 

 

 

Borrowings

 

On November 16, 2009, Fifth Street Funding, LLC, a consolidated wholly-owned bankruptcy remote, special purpose subsidiary (“Funding”), and we entered into a Loan and Servicing Agreement (“Agreement”), with respect to a three-year credit facility (“Wells Fargo facility”) with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (“Wells Fargo”), as successor to Wachovia Bank, National Association (“Wachovia”), Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, as administrative agent, each of the additional institutional and conduit lenders party thereto from time to time, and each of the lender agents party thereto from time to time, in the amount of $50 million, with an accordion feature which allowed for potential future expansion of the facility up to $100 million. The facility bore interest at LIBOR plus 4.0% per annum and had a maturity date of November 16, 2012.

 

On May 26, 2010, we amended the Wells Fargo facility to expand the borrowing capacity under that facility. Pursuant to the amendment, we received an additional $50 million commitment, thereby increasing the size of the facility from $50 million to $100 million, with an accordion feature that allows for potential future expansion of that facility from a total of $100 million up to a total of $150 million. In addition, the interest rate of the Wells Fargo facility was reduced from LIBOR plus 4% per annum to LIBOR plus 3.5% per annum, with no LIBOR floor, and the maturity date of the facility was extended from November 16, 2012 to May 26, 2013. The facility may be extended for up to two additional years upon the mutual consent of Wells Fargo and each of the lender parties thereto.

In connection with the Wells Fargo facility, we concurrently entered into (i) a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Funding, pursuant to which we will sell to Funding certain loan assets we have originated or acquired, or will originate or acquire and (ii) a Pledge Agreement with Wells Fargo, pursuant to which we pledged all of our equity interests in Funding as security for the payment of Funding’s obligations under the Agreement and other documents entered into in connection with the Wells Fargo facility.

 

The Agreement and related agreements governing the Wells Fargo facility required both Funding and us to, among other things (i) make representations and warranties regarding the collateral as well as each of our businesses, (ii) agree to certain indemnification obligations, and (iii) comply with various covenants, servicing procedures, limitations on acquiring and disposing of assets, reporting requirements and other customary requirements for similar credit facilities. The Wells Fargo facility agreements also include usual and customary default provisions such as the failure to make timely payments under the facility, a change in control of Funding, and the failure by Funding or us to materially perform under the Agreement and related agreements governing the facility, which, if not complied with, could accelerate repayment under the facility, thereby materially and adversely affecting our liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

 

The Wells Fargo facility is secured by all of the assets of Funding, and all of our equity interest in Funding. We intend to use the net proceeds of the Wells Fargo facility to fund a portion of our loan origination activities and for general corporate purposes. Each loan origination under the facility is subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. We cannot be assured that Funding will be able to borrow funds under the Wells Fargo facility at any particular time or at all. As of September 30, 2010, we had no borrowings outstanding under the Wells Fargo facility.

 

On May 27, 2010, we entered into a three-year secured syndicated revolving credit facility (“ING facility”) pursuant to a Senior Secured Revolving Credit Agreement (“ING Credit Agreement”) with certain lenders party thereto from time to time and ING Capital LLC, as administrative agent. The ING facility allows for us to borrow money at a rate of either (i) LIBOR plus 3.5% per annum or (ii) 2.5% per annum plus an alternate base rate based on the greatest of the Prime Rate, Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5% per annum or LIBOR plus 1% per annum, and has a maturity date of May 27, 2013. The ING facility also allows us to request letters of credit from ING Capital LLC, as the issuing bank. The initial commitment under the ING facility is $90 million, and the ING facility includes an accordion feature that allows for potential future expansion of the facility up to a total of $150 million. The ING facility is secured by substantially all of our assets, as well as the assets of two of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, FSFC Holdings, Inc. and FSF/MP Holdings, Inc., subject to certain exclusions for, among other things, equity interests in our SBIC subsidiary and equity interests in Funding as further set forth in a Guarantee, Pledge and Security Agreement (“ING Security Agreement”) entered into in connection with the ING Credit Agreement, among FSFC Holdings, Inc., FSF/MP Holdings, Inc., ING Capital LLC, as collateral agent, and us. Neither our SBIC subsidiary nor Funding is party to the ING facility and their respective assets have not been pledged in connection therewith. The ING facility provides that we may use the proceeds and letters of credit under the facility for general corporate purposes, including acquiring and funding leveraged loans, mezzanine loans, high-yield securities, convertible securities, preferred stock, common stock and other investments.

 

Pursuant to the ING Security Agreement, FSFC Holdings, Inc. and FSF/MP Holdings, Inc. guaranteed the obligations under the ING Security Agreement, including our obligations to the lenders and the administrative agent under the ING Credit Agreement. Additionally, we pledged our entire equity interests in FSFC Holdings, Inc. and FSF/MP Holdings, Inc. to the collateral agent pursuant to the terms of the ING Security Agreement.

 

The ING Credit Agreement and related agreements governing the ING facility required FSFC Holdings, Inc., FSF/MP Holdings, Inc. and us to, among other things (i) make representations and warranties regarding the collateral as well as each of our businesses, (ii) agree to certain indemnification obligations, and (iii) agree to comply with various affirmative and negative covenants and other customary requirements for similar credit facilities. The ING facility documents also include usual and customary default provisions such as the failure to make timely payments under the facility, the occurrence of a change in control, and the failure by us to materially perform under the ING Credit Agreement and related agreements governing the facility, which, if

not complied with, could accelerate repayment under the facility, thereby materially and adversely affecting our liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Each loan or letter of credit originated under the ING facility is subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. We cannot be assured that we will be able to borrow funds under the ING facility at any particular time or at all.

 

Through September 30, 2010, there had been no borrowings or repayments on the ING facility.

 

As of September 30, 2010, except for assets that were funded through our SBIC subsidiary, substantially all of our assets were pledged as collateral under the Wells Fargo facility or the ING facility.

 

Interest expense for the years ended September 30, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $1.9 million, $0.6 million, and $0.9 million, respectively.

 

The following table describes significant financial covenants with which we must comply under each of our credit facilities on a quarterly basis:

 

 

 

 

We and our SBIC subsidiary are also subject to certain regulatory requirements relating to our borrowings. For a discussion of such requirements, see “Item 1. Business — Regulation — Business Development Company Regulations” and “— Small Business Investment Company Regulations.”

 

The following table reflects credit facility and debenture transactions that occurred from October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2010. Amounts available and drawn are as of September 30, 2010.