|
Report Date : |
10.11.2012 |
IDENTIFICATION DETAILS
|
Name : |
KAPSTONE |
|
|
|
|
Registered Office : |
|
|
|
|
|
Country : |
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Incorporation : |
26.03.2008 |
|
|
|
|
Legal Form : |
Limited Liability Company |
|
|
|
|
Line of Business : |
Manufacturer of paper and
related products. |
|
|
|
|
No. of Employees : |
300 |
RATING & COMMENTS
|
MIRA’s Rating : |
B |
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
26-40 |
B |
Capability to overcome financial difficulties seems comparatively
below average. |
Small |
|
Status : |
Moderate |
|
Payment Behaviour : |
No Complaints |
|
Litigation : |
Clear |
NOTES:
Any query related to this report can be made
on e-mail: infodept@mirainform.com
while quoting report number, name and date.
ECGC Country Risk Classification List – June 30th, 2012
|
Country Name |
Previous Rating (31.03.2012) |
Current Rating (30.06.2012) |
|
|
A1 |
A1 |
|
Risk Category |
ECGC
Classification |
|
Insignificant |
A1 |
|
Low |
A2 |
|
Moderate |
B1 |
|
High |
B2 |
|
Very High |
C1 |
|
Restricted |
C2 |
|
Off-credit |
D |
United States - ECONOMIC OVERVIEW
The
|
Source : CIA |
Company name: KAPSTONE CHARLESTON KRAFT LLC
Address:
Telephone: 843-745-3025
Fax: 843-745-3067
Website: www.lapstonepaper.com
Corporate ID#: 4525470
State:
Judicial form: LLC
Date founded: 03-26-2008
Stock: -
Value: -
Name of manager: Roger
Warren STONE
Business:
Manufacture paper and
related products.
Export to Central and South
America, Europe and
EIN: -
Staff: 300
Operations & branches:
At the headquarters, we
find a paper mill, warehouse and office, owned.
The Company maintains a
lumber mill located:
Shareholders:
KAPSTONE PAPER AND PACKAGING CORPORATION
Ph:
847-239-8800
Fx: 847-205-7551
KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation engages in the production and
sale of unbleached kraft, linerboard, saturating kraft, and unbleached folding
carton boards in the
The Company is quoted with the NYSE under symbol KS.
Consolidate Sales 2011: USD 906,100,000=
Net profit: USD
124,000,000=
On July 1, 2008, KapStone purchased the Charleston Kraft Business from
MeadWestvaco, which consists of a large paper mill in
an on-site cogeneration facility; a lumber mill in
Management:
Roger Warren STONE is the Manager.
Mr. Roger Warren Stone has been the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
of KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation since April 2005.
Mr. Stone serves as the Chief Executive Officer of Box USA Holdings,
Inc. He serves as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of KapStone Kraft Paper
Corporation. He serves as Manager at Stone-Kaplan Investments, LLC.
He served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of RockTenn CP,
LLC (formerly Smurfit-Stone Container Enterprises, Inc.).
He served as Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer of KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation from April 2005 to January
2007. He serves as the Chairman of International Paper Inc; and Box USA
Holdings, Inc. He has been the Non-Executive Chairman at Stone Tan China
Acquisition Corp. since January 2007.
He has been a Director of McDonald's Corp. since 1989 and Morton
International, Inc. since April 30, 1997. He has been a Member of Advisory
Board at Z-Trim Holdings, Inc. since August 2012. He served as a Director of
The First National Bank of Chicago and First Chicago Corporation.
He served as a Director at Option Care Inc.
He served as a Director of Autoliv, Inc. from May 1997 to April 26, 2005
and PaperExchange.com, L.L.C since August 1999.
Mr. Stone received a B.S. in Economics from the
Matthew KAPLAN is the
President and COO.
Mr. Matthew Kaplan has been the President and Secretary of KapStone Paper
and Packaging Corporation (formerly Stone Arcade Acquisition Corp.) since April
15, 2005 and has been its Chief Operating Officer since 2007. Mr. Kaplan has
been Manager of Stone-Kaplan Investments, LLC since July 2004. He served as the
President and Chief Operating Officer of Box USA Holdings, Inc. from July 2000
to July 2004. He began his career at Stone Container Corporation in 1979 and
served as its Senior Vice President and General Manager of North American
Operations. He served as Vice President and General Manager of Container
Division at Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation until March 1999. He has been a
Director of KapStone Paper and Packaging Corporation since April 15, 2005 and
American Forest & Paper Association Inc. since February 2011. He served as
a Trustee of Magnetar Spectrum Fund since 2007. He served as a Director of Box
USA Holdings, Inc., from July 2000 to July 2004. Mr. Kaplan received a B.A. in
Economics from the
from the
Andrea TARBOX is the CFO.
Subsidiaries &Partnership:
None
In
On a direct call, nobody
accepted to answer our questions.
All financials are
consolidated into the parent company.
Banks: JP Morgan Chase Bank
...
Legal filings
& complaints:
As of today date, there is no legal filing pending with the District
Courts.
Secured debts summary (UCC):
None
Trade references:
Date reported: October 2012
High credit: USD 12,000
Now owing: 0
Past due: 0
Last purchase: September 2012
Line of business: Office supply
Paying status: On terms
Date reported: October 2012
High credit: USD 500,000+
Now owing: 0
Past due: 0
Last purchase: September 2012
Line of business: Payroll
Paying status: As agreed
Date reported: October 2012
High credit: USD 1,200
Now owing: 0
Past due: 0
Last purchase: September 2012
Line of business: Telecommunications
Paying status: On terms
Domestic credit history:
Domestic credit history
appears as follow:
|
Monthly Payment Trends - Recent Activity |
|
National Credit Bureaus
gave a bad credit rating.
According to our credit analysts, during the last 6 months, payments are
made with an average of 15 to 30 days beyond terms.
International
credit history:
Payments of imports are currently made with an average of 5 days beyond
terms.
Other comments:
The Company maintains a
regular business.
The bank confirmed late
payments and a low account.
The Company is in good
standing.
This means that all local
and federal taxes were paid on due date.
The risk is medium/high.
Our opinion:
A business connection may
be conducted but we suggest you to check regularly the way of payments.
Standard
& Poor’s
|
|
|
Publication
date: 05-Aug-2011 20:13:14 EST |
·
We have lowered our long-term
sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and
affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
·
We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings
from CreditWatch negative.
·
The downgrade reflects our opinion
that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration
recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to
stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
·
More broadly, the downgrade
reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of
American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of
ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when
we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
·
Since then, we have changed our
view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties
over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress
and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a
broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics
any time soon.
·
The outlook on the long-term rating
is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two
years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest
rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general
government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
The
transfer and convertibility (T&C) assessment of the
debt service--remains
'AAA'.
We lowered our long-term
rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over
raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate
indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public
spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising
revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a
contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation
plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of
the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government
debt burden by the middle of the decade.
Our lowering of the
rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden and our
perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent with our criteria
(see "Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and
Assumptions ," June 30, 2011,
especially Paragraphs 36-41). Nevertheless, we view the
We have taken the ratings
off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment
of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by
delays to raising the government's debt ceiling. In addition, we believe that
the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course
of
The
political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as
the containment of which
we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal
sustainability.
Our opinion is that
elected officials remain wary of tackling the structural issues required to
effectively address the rising U.S. public debt burden in a manner consistent with
a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated sovereign peers (see Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and
Assumptions," June 30, 2011,
especially Paragraphs 36-41). In our view, the difficulty in framing a
consensus on fiscal policy weakens the government's ability to manage public
finances and diverts attention from the debate over how to achieve more
balanced and dynamic economic growth in an era of fiscal stringency and
private-sector deleveraging (ibid). A new political consensus might (or might
not) emerge after the 2012 elections, but we believe that by then, the
government debt burden will likely be higher, the needed medium-term fiscal
adjustment potentially greater, and the inflection point on the U.S.
population's demographics and other age-related spending drivers closer at hand
(see "Global Aging 2011: In The U.S., Going Gray Will Likely
Cost Even More Green, Now,"
June 21, 2011).
Standard & Poor's
takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue measures that Congress and
the Administration might conclude is appropriate for putting the
The act calls for as much
as $2.4 trillion of reductions in expenditure growth over the 10 years through
2021. These cuts will be implemented in two steps: the $917 billion agreed to
initially, followed by an additional $1.5 trillion that the newly formed
Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is supposed to
recommend by November 2011. The act contains no measures to raise taxes or
otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them.
The act further provides
that if Congress does not enact the committee's recommendations, cuts of $1.2
trillion will be implemented over the same time period. The reductions would
mainly affect outlays for civilian discretionary spending, defense, and
Medicare. We understand that this fall-back mechanism is designed to encourage
Congress to embrace a more balanced mix of expenditure savings, as the
committee might recommend.
We note that in a letter
to Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated
total budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the
next 10 years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal
projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the
CBO's latest "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" of June 2011, updated to
include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to Congress. In
general, the CBO's "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" assumes a continuation
of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.
We view the act's
measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation. However, this is within the
framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves open the details of what is
finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and Congress and the Administration
could modify any agreement in the future. Even assuming that at least $2.1
trillion of the spending reductions the act envisages are implemented, we
maintain our view that the
Compared with previous
projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003
tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed
our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue
to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress
reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case
scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near
2% annually over the decade.
Our revised upside
scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the
outlook on the 'AA+' long-term rating being revised to stable--retains these
same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of
new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners
lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario,
we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated
74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.
Our revised downside
scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as being consistent with a
possible further downgrade to a 'AA' long-term rating--features less-favorable
macroeconomic assumptions, as outlined below and also assumes that the second
round of spending cuts (at least $1.2 trillion) that the act calls for does not
occur. This scenario also assumes somewhat higher nominal interest rates for
U.S. Treasuries. We still believe that the role of the U.S. dollar as the key
reserve currency confers a government funding advantage, one that could change
only slowly over time, and that Fed policy might lean toward continued loose
monetary policy at a time of fiscal tightening. Nonetheless, it is possible
that interest rates could rise if investors re-price relative risks. As a
result, our alternate scenario factors in a 50 basis point (bp)-75 bp rise in
10-year bond yields relative to the base and upside cases from 2013 onwards. In
this scenario, we project the net public debt burden would rise from 74% of GDP
in 2011 to 90% in 2015 and to 101% by 2021.
Our revised scenarios
also take into account the significant negative revisions to historical GDP
data that the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced on July 29. From our
perspective, the effect of these revisions underscores two related points when
evaluating the likely debt trajectory of the
When comparing the U.S.
to sovereigns with 'AAA' long-term ratings that we view as relevant peers--Canada,
France, Germany, and the U.K.--we also observe, based on our base case
scenarios for each, that the trajectory of the U.S.'s net public debt is
diverging from the others. Including the
Standard & Poor's
transfer T&C assessment of the
The outlook on the
long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate fiscal scenario
illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently assume could
lead us to lower the long-term rating again. On the other hand, as our upside
scenario highlights, if the recommendations of the Congressional Joint Select
Committee on Deficit Reduction--independently or coupled with other
initiatives, such as the lapsing of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high
earners--lead to fiscal consolidation measures beyond the minimum mandated, and
we believe they are likely to slow the deterioration of the government's debt
dynamics, the long-term rating could stabilize at 'AA+'.
FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATES
|
Currency |
Unit
|
Indian Rupees |
|
US Dollar |
1 |
Rs.54.34 |
|
|
1 |
Rs.86.97 |
|
Euro |
1 |
Rs.69.43 |
INFORMATION DETAILS
|
Report Prepared
by : |
MNL |
RATING EXPLANATIONS
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
>86 |
Aaa |
Possesses an extremely sound financial base with the strongest capability
for timely payment of interest and principal sums |
Unlimited |
|
71-85 |
Aa |
Possesses adequate working capital. No caution needed for credit
transaction. It has above average (strong) capability for payment of interest
and principal sums |
Large |
|
56-70 |
A |
Financial & operational base are regarded healthy. General
unfavourable factors will not cause fatal effect. Satisfactory capability for
payment of interest and principal sums |
Fairly Large |
|
41-55 |
Ba |
Overall operation is considered normal. Capable to meet normal
commitments. |
Satisfactory |
|
26-40 |
B |
Capability to overcome financial difficulties seems comparatively
below average. |
Small |
|
11-25 |
Ca |
Adverse factors are apparent. Repayment of interest and principal sums
in default or expected to be in default upon maturity |
Limited with
full security |
|
<10 |
C |
Absolute credit risk exists. Caution needed to be exercised |
Credit not
recommended |
|
---- |
NB |
New Business |
---- |
This score serves as a reference to assess SC’s credit risk
and to set the amount of credit to be extended. It is calculated from a
composite of weighted scores obtained from each of the major sections of this report.
The assessed factors and their relative weights (as indicated through %) are as
follows:
Financial
condition (40%) Ownership
background (20%) Payment
record (10%)
Credit history
(10%) Market trend
(10%) Operational
size (10%)
This report is issued at your request without any
risk and responsibility on the part of MIRA INFORM PRIVATE LIMITED (MIPL)
or its officials.