UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the Registrant þ

Filed by a Party other than the Registrant o

Check the appropriate box:

o		Preliminary Proxy Statement
o		Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))
þ		Definitive Proxy Statement
o		Definitive Additional Materials
o		Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12

EXPRESS-1 EXPEDITED SOLUTIONS, INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

N/A

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

þ		No fee required.
o		Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

	(1)		Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:
	(2)		Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:
	(3)		Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):
	(4)		Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:
	(5)		Total fee paid:

o		Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.
o		Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

	(1)		Amount Previously Paid:
	(2)		Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:
	(3)		Filing Party:
	(4)		Date Filed:

 

 

EXPRESS-1 EXPEDITED SOLUTIONS, INC.
3399 South Lakeshore Drive, Suite 225
Saint Joseph, Michigan 49085

 

 

August 3, 2011

 

 

Dear Fellow Stockholders:

 

On behalf of the Board of Directors of Express-1 Expedited Solutions, Inc., a Delaware Corporation (the “Company”, “we”, “us” or “our”), we invite you to join us at a special meeting of stockholders of the Company, which will be held in the Express-1, Inc. Training Center located at 441 Post Road, Buchanan, MI 49107, at 9:00 a.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on September 1, 2011.

 

On June 13, 2011, the Company entered into an Investment Agreement (the “Investment Agreement”) with Jacobs Private Equity, LLC (“JPE”) and the other investors party thereto (including by joinders thereto) (collectively with JPE, the “Investors”), providing for an aggregate investment by the Investors of up to $150,000,000 in cash in the Company, including amounts payable upon exercise of the warrants described herein. Up to an aggregate of $135,000,000 of such investment will be made by JPE. The Investment Agreement has been approved by the Company’s Board of Directors, acting upon the unanimous recommendation of a special committee composed of independent directors. Following the closing of the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement, JPE will be the controlling stockholder of the Company, and Bradley Jacobs, the Managing Member of JPE, will become Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Company. Mr. Jacobs will also become the Company’s Chief Executive Officer following the closing. The Company expects to use the proceeds primarily to make strategic acquisitions and any balance will be used for general corporate purposes.

 

As controlling stockholder, JPE intends to cause the Company to leverage its prominent positions in expedited transportation solutions, freight brokerage and freight forwarding to make the Company a platform for growth through strategic acquisitions and organic expansion, with a view to building a multi-billion dollar market leader.

 

Subject to the terms and conditions of the Investment Agreement, upon the closing, the Company will issue to the Investors, for $75,000,000 in cash, (i) shares of Series A Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock of the Company (the “Preferred Stock”), which will initially be convertible into an aggregate of 42,857,143 shares of Company common stock (subject to adjustment in connection with the contemplated reverse stock split described below) and will vote together with the Company common stock on an “as-converted” basis on all matters on which the Company common stock may vote, except as otherwise required by law, and (ii) warrants to purchase 42,857,143 shares of Company common stock at an initial exercise price of $1.75 per share (subject to adjustment in connection with the contemplated reverse stock split described below) (the “Warrants”, and together with the Preferred Stock, the “Securities”). We refer to this investment as the “Equity Investment”, and to the Equity Investment collectively with the other transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement as the “Proposed Transaction”.

 

In connection with the closing of the Equity Investment, the common stock of the Company will undergo a 4:1 reverse stock split.

 

Upon the closing of the Equity Investment, the Board of Directors will be reconstituted such that: (i) there will be eight Board members, (ii) one of such directors will be James Martell, our current Chairman, (iii) seven of such directors will be designated by JPE (including Bradley Jacobs), (iv) each standing committee of the Board will be reconstituted in a manner reasonably acceptable to JPE and (v) Bradley Jacobs will become the Chairman of the Board. After giving effect to the reconstitution of the Board, a majority of the members of the Board will continue to be independent.

 

You will be asked, at the special meeting of the Company’s stockholders, to vote to approve, as a condition to the Equity Investment, each of the following:

 

 

The failure of the Company’s stockholders to approve any of the foregoing Proposals 1 through 5 will prevent the Company from consummating the Proposed Transaction.

 

In addition, you will be asked, at the special meeting of the Company’s stockholders, to vote to approve an amendment to the Company Certificate to change the name of the Company to XPO Logistics, Inc. The implementation of this Proposal 6 is conditioned on approval of each of Proposals 1 through 5.

 

The Board of Directors believes that the Proposed Transaction and Proposal 6 are in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders and, therefore, recommends that the Company’s stockholders vote “FOR” Proposals 1 through 6 at the special meeting.

 

The proxy statement attached to this letter provides you with information about the Proposed Transaction and the special meeting of the Company’s stockholders. We encourage you to read the entire proxy statement carefully. You may also obtain more information about the Company from documents we have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. See “Where You Can Find Additional Information” in the accompanying proxy statement.

 

Regardless of the number of shares of Company common stock you own, your vote is important. Because certain of the Proposals require the approval of a majority of the outstanding shares of Company common stock, the failure to vote on any such Proposal will have the same effect as a vote against such Proposal. Whether or not you plan to attend the special meeting, please take the time to submit a proxy by following the instructions on your proxy card as soon as possible. If your shares of Company common stock are held in an account at a broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee, you should instruct such broker or other nominee how to vote in accordance with the voting instruction form furnished by such broker or other nominee.

 

Voting by proxy will not prevent you from voting your shares in person if you subsequently choose to attend the special meeting.

 

Thank you for your cooperation and continued support.

 

Sincerely,

 

Michael R. Welch

Director and Chief Executive Officer

 

THE ACCOMPANYING PROXY STATEMENT IS DATED AUGUST 3, 2011
AND IS FIRST BEING MAILED TO STOCKHOLDERS ON OR ABOUT AUGUST 4, 2011.

 

EXPRESS-1 EXPEDITED SOLUTIONS, INC.
3399 South Lakeshore Drive, Suite 225
Saint Joseph, Michigan 49085

 

 

NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS
TO BE HELD ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2011

 

 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of stockholders of Express-1 Expedited Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”, “we”, “us” or ‘‘our”), will be held in the Express-1, Inc. Training Center, located at 441 Post Road, Buchanan, MI 49107, at 9:00 a.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on September 1, 2011, for the following purposes:

 

 

 

 

 

Only stockholders of record as of the close of business on August 1, 2011, are entitled to notice of and to vote at the special meeting and at any adjournment or postponement of the special meeting. All stockholders of record are cordially invited to attend the special meeting in person.

 

The issuance of the Securities (Proposal 1) and the adoption of the Plan (Proposal 5) require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock voting thereon at a meeting at which a quorum is present. The amendment to increase the number of authorized shares of Company common stock (Proposal 2), the amendment to give effect to the Reverse Stock Split (Proposal 3), the amendment to provide that vacancies on the Board of Directors shall be filled by the remaining directors or director (Proposal 4) and

the amendment to effect the Company name change (Proposal 6) require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock outstanding at the close of business on the record date. The approval of the adjournment of the special meeting (Proposal 7) requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock present and entitled to vote at the special meeting, whether or not a quorum is present.

 

The failure of the Company’s stockholders to approve any of Proposals 1 through 5 will prevent the Company from consummating the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement and effecting the Company name change (Proposal 6).

 

Even if you plan to attend the special meeting in person, we request that you submit a proxy by following the instructions on your proxy card as soon as possible and thus ensure that your shares will be represented at the special meeting if you are unable to attend. Because Proposals 2, 3, 4 and 6 require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock outstanding at the close of business on the record date, the failure to vote on any such Proposal will have the same effect as a vote against such Proposal. If you sign, date and return your proxy card without indicating how you wish to vote, your vote will be counted as a vote “FOR” Proposals 1 through 6 (and, if necessary and appropriate, Proposal 7). If your shares of Company common stock are held in an account at a broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee, you should instruct such broker or other nominee how to vote in accordance with the voting instruction form furnished by such broker or other nominee.

 

Whether you attend the special meeting or not, you may revoke a proxy at any time before your proxy is voted at the special meeting. You may do so by properly delivering a later-dated proxy either by mail, the internet or telephone or by attending the special meeting in person and voting. You also may revoke your proxy by delivering a notice of revocation to the Company (Attention: Chief Executive Officer, 3399 South Lakeshore Drive, Suite 225, Saint Joseph, Michigan 49085) prior to the vote at the special meeting. If you hold your shares through a broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee, you should follow the instructions of such broker or other nominee regarding revocation of proxies.

 

By order of the Board of Directors,

 

Michael R. Welch

Director and Chief Executive Officer

 

Saint Joseph, Michigan

 

August 3, 2011

 

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Stockholders Meeting To Be Held on September 1, 2011

This proxy statement for the special meeting to be held on September 1, 2011, is available free of charge at www.envisionreports.com/XPO2.

SUMMARY VOTING INSTRUCTIONS

 

Ensure that your shares of Company common stock can be voted at the special meeting by submitting your proxy or contacting your broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee.

 

If your shares of Company common stock are registered in the name of a broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee: check the voting instruction card forwarded by your broker or other nominee to see which voting options are available or contact such broker or other nominee in order to obtain directions as to how to ensure that your shares of Company common stock are voted at the special meeting.

 

If your shares of Company common stock are registered in your name: submit your proxy as soon as possible by telephone, via the internet or by signing, dating and returning the enclosed proxy card in the enclosed postage-paid envelope, so that your shares of Company common stock can be voted at the special meeting.

 

Instructions regarding telephone and internet voting are included on the proxy card.

 

Because Proposals 2, 3, 4 and 6 require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock outstanding at the close of business on the record date, the failure to vote on any such Proposal will have the same effect as a vote against such Proposal. The failure of the Company’s stockholders to approve any of Proposals 1 through 5 will prevent the Company from consummating the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement and effecting the Company name change (Proposal 6). If you sign, date and return your proxy card without indicating how you wish to vote, your vote will be counted as a vote “FOR” Proposals 1 through 6 (and, if necessary and appropriate, Proposal 7).

 

For additional questions about the Proposed Transaction, assistance in submitting proxies or voting shares of Company common stock, or to request additional copies of the proxy statement or the enclosed proxy card, please contact the Company at (269) 429-9761.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

The following questions and answers address briefly some questions you may have regarding the special meeting and the Proposals. These questions and answers may not address all questions that may be important to you as a stockholder of the Company. Please refer to the more detailed information contained elsewhere in this proxy statement, the annexes to this proxy statement and the documents referred to or incorporated by reference in this proxy statement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following summary highlights selected information from this proxy statement and may not contain all of the information that may be important to you. Accordingly, we encourage you to read carefully this entire proxy statement, its annexes and the documents referred to or incorporated by reference in this proxy statement. Each item in this summary includes a page reference directing you to a more complete description of that item.

 

The Parties to the Proposed Transaction (Page 12)

 

Express-1 Expedited Solutions, Inc.

3399 South Lakeshore Drive, Suite 225

Saint Joseph, Michigan 49085

(269) 429-9761

 

The Company is a non-asset-based, third-party logistics services provider that uses a network of relationships with ground, sea and air carriers to find the best transportation solutions for its customers. The Company offers its services through three distinct business units: Express-1, Inc. (expedited transportation solutions), the fifth largest U.S. expedited freight service provider, according to The Journal of Commerce; Concert Group Logistics, Inc. (domestic and international freight forwarding); and Bounce Logistics, Inc. (premium truckload brokerage). The Company serves more than 4,000 retail, commercial, manufacturing and industrial customers through six U.S. operations centers and 22 agent locations. In 2010, the Company completed more than 144,000 transactions for customers and generated revenues of approximately $158 million. More information about the Company may be found in the documents we file with the SEC. See “Where You Can Find Additional Information” on page 96.

 

Jacobs Private Equity, LLC

350 Round Hill Road

Greenwich, CT 06831

(203) 413-4000

 

JPE is an investment vehicle of Bradley Jacobs.

 

Since 1979, Bradley Jacobs has founded and led four highly successful companies, including two multi-billion dollar, publicly-traded corporations: United Rentals (NYSE: URI), the world’s largest equipment rental company, and United Waste Systems, which was sold in 1997 for $2.5 billion. As Chairman of United Rentals from 1997 through 2007, Mr. Jacobs grew the company to $3.9 billion in revenues, with more than 700 branch locations, 13,000 employees, and a ranking as the 536th largest public corporation in America by Fortune magazine.

 

In 1989, Mr. Jacobs founded United Waste and built it into the fifth largest solid waste management business in North America. In 1987, he founded Hamilton Resources (UK) Ltd., a worldwide oil trading company that served major oil companies and oil-producing countries and generated annual revenues of approximately $1 billion. In 1979, he co-founded Amerex Oil Associates, Inc., creating one of the world’s largest oil brokerage firms, with an annual gross contract volume of approximately $4.7 billion.

 

Business Strategy

 

As controlling stockholder, JPE intends to cause the Company to leverage its prominent positions in expedited transportation solutions, freight brokerage and freight forwarding to make the Company a platform for growth through strategic acquisitions and organic expansion, with a view to building a multi-billion dollar market leader.

 

The Special Meeting

 

Time, Place and Date (Page 13)

 

The special meeting will be held in the Express-1, Inc. Training Center located at 441 Post Road, Buchanan, MI 49107, at 9:00 a.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on September 1, 2011.

 

Purpose (Page 13)

 

You will be asked to consider and vote upon the following Proposals in connection with the Proposed Transaction, the approval of each of which is a condition to the closing of the Proposed Transaction:

 

 

 

 

In addition, you will be asked to consider and vote upon an amendment to the Company Certificate to change the name of the Company to XPO Logistics, Inc. (Proposal 6).

 

In conjunction with the special meeting, you will also be asked to approve the adjournment of the special meeting, if necessary or appropriate, to solicit additional proxies if there are insufficient votes at the time of the special meeting to adopt Proposals 1 through 5. You will also be asked to transact such other business as may properly come before the special meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof.

 

Record Date and Voting (Page 13)

 

You are entitled to vote at the special meeting if you owned shares of Company common stock as of the close of business on August 1, 2011, the record date for the special meeting. You will have one vote for each share of Company common stock that you owned on the record date. There are 33,011,561 shares of Company common stock entitled to be voted.

 

Vote Required (Page 13)

 

The issuance of the Securities (Proposal 1) and the adoption of the Plan (Proposal 5) require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock voting thereon at a meeting at which a quorum is present. The amendment to increase the number of authorized shares of Company common stock (Proposal 2), the amendment to give effect to the Reverse Stock Split (Proposal 3), the amendment to provide that vacancies on the Board of Directors shall be filled by the remaining directors or director (Proposal 4) and the amendment to effect the Company name change (Proposal 6) require the affirmative vote of a majority of shares of Company common stock outstanding at the close of business on the record date. The approval of the adjournment of the special meeting (Proposal 7) requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock present and entitled to vote at the special meeting, whether or not a quorum is present. Failure to approve any of Proposals 1 through 5 will cause the Proposed Transaction not to occur.

 

Voting and Proxies (Page 13)

 

Any Company stockholder entitled to vote may vote by returning the enclosed proxy card or by telephone or internet in accordance with the instructions on the enclosed proxy card, or by appearing at the special meeting. If your shares are held in “street name” by your broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee, you should instruct such broker or other nominee on how to vote your shares using the instructions provided by such broker or other nominee.

 

Share Ownership of Directors and Executive Officers (Page 14)

 

As of August 1, 2011, the record date for the special meeting, and excluding any shares issuable upon the exercise of currently outstanding options, our directors and current executive officers beneficially owned, in the aggregate, 4,289,917 shares of Company common stock, or collectively approximately 13.0% of the outstanding shares of Company common stock.

 

Revocability of Proxy (Page 14)

 

Whether you attend the special meeting or not, you may revoke a proxy at any time before your proxy is voted at the special meeting. You may do so by properly delivering a later-dated proxy either by mail, telephone or the internet or by attending the special meeting in person and voting. You also may revoke your proxy by delivering a notice of revocation to the Company (Attention: Chief Executive Officer, 3399 South Lakeshore Drive, Suite 225, Saint Joseph, Michigan 49085) prior to the vote at the special meeting.

 

Simply attending the special meeting will not constitute revocation of a proxy. If you have instructed your broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee to vote your shares, the above-described options for revoking your proxy do not apply and instead you must follow the directions provided by such broker or other nominee regarding revocation of proxies.

 

Recommendation of the Company’s Board of Directors (Page 27)

 

After careful consideration, our Board of Directors, acting upon the unanimous recommendation of a special committee composed of independent directors, recommends that the Company’s stockholders vote “FOR” the approval of each of Proposals 1 through 6 (and, if necessary and appropriate, Proposal 7).

 

Financial Advisor’s Opinion (Page 28)

 

Ladenburg Thalmann & Co. Inc. (“Ladenburg”) has delivered to the special committee of the Company’s Board of Directors its opinion, dated June 12, 2011, to the effect that, as of June 12, 2011, based upon and subject to the assumptions made, matters considered, procedures followed and limitations on Ladenburg’s review as set forth in the opinion, the Proposed Transaction is fair, from a financial point of view, to our stockholders. The full text of the written opinion, setting forth the assumptions made, matters considered, procedures followed and limitations in connection with the opinion, is attached as Annex B to this proxy statement. We recommend that you read the opinion in its entirety.

 

Ownership Upon Closing (Page 35)

 

As of the record date, there were 33,011,561 shares of Company common stock outstanding, plus outstanding options to purchase an additional 3,267,750 shares of Company common stock. Based upon the number of shares of Company common stock outstanding on the record date, and excluding any shares issuable upon the exercise of currently outstanding options, the Investors would have held in the aggregate approximately 56.5% of the total voting power of the capital stock of the Company before giving effect to the exercise of any Warrants, and approximately 72.2% of the total voting power of the capital stock of the Company after giving effect to the exercise of all of the Warrants. Because the Preferred Stock votes on an “as converted” basis, the conversion of the Preferred Stock into Company common stock will not reduce the general voting power of the Investors allocable to the Preferred Stock upon its issuance. The Reverse Stock Split will not affect the relative percentage of the voting power held by any stockholder or Investor (except as a result of any cash paid in lieu of fractional shares in connection with the Reverse Stock Split).

 

Interests of the Company’s Directors and Executive Officers in the Proposed Transaction (Page 35)

 

Our directors and executive officers may have interests in the Proposed Transaction that are different from, or in addition to, yours, including the vesting of stock options and the entitlement to certain other benefits pursuant to their employment agreements. James Martell, our current Chairman, is an Investor in the Equity Investment and is expected to continue as a member of the Board of Directors following the closing of the Equity Investment, and consequently he recused himself from the Board of Directors’ approval of the

Proposed Transaction and recommendation of the Proposals. Our Board of Directors was aware of these interests and considered them, among other matters, in making its determinations.

 

When the Proposed Transaction Will be Completed (Page 43)

 

We anticipate completing the Proposed Transaction in the third quarter of 2011, subject to receipt of stockholder approvals and satisfaction of the other closing conditions.

 

No Solicitation of Transactions (Page 48)

 

The Investment Agreement contains restrictions on our ability to solicit or engage in discussions or negotiations with third parties regarding specified transactions involving the Company. Notwithstanding these restrictions, under certain circumstances, our Board of Directors may respond to a bona fide written unsolicited proposal for an alternative acquisition. In certain circumstances, we may also change our recommendation to the Company’s stockholders, terminate the Investment Agreement and enter into an agreement with respect to a “superior acquisition proposal”.

 

Composition of Board of Directors (Page 50)

 

Upon the closing, the Board of Directors of the Company will be reconstituted such that: (i) there will be eight Board members, (ii) one of such directors will be James Martell, our current Chairman (or a replacement acceptable to JPE), (iii) seven of such directors will be designated by JPE (including Bradley Jacobs), (iv) each standing committee of the Board will be reconstituted in a manner reasonably acceptable to JPE and (v) Bradley Jacobs will become the Chairman of the Board. After giving effect to the reconstitution of the Board, a majority of the members of the Board will continue to be independent. Additionally, following the closing, JPE will be entitled to nominate for election to the Board in connection with each meeting of stockholders at which directors are to be elected (i) a majority of the directors on the Board, for so long as JPE controls at least 33% of the total voting power of the capital stock of the Company on a fully-diluted basis or (ii) 25% of the directors on the Board, for so long as JPE controls at least 20% (but less than 33%) of the total voting power of the capital stock of the Company on a fully-diluted basis.

 

Conditions to Closing (Page 51)

 

The respective obligations of the Investors and the Company to complete the Proposed Transaction are subject to the satisfaction or waiver of certain conditions, including the condition that Proposals 1 through 5 have been approved by the stockholders.

 

The Company and JPE have determined that no filing under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (the “HSR Act”), or any similar antitrust approval, is required in connection with the Equity Investment.

 

The obligations of the Investors to complete the Proposed Transaction are also subject to the satisfaction or waiver of certain conditions, including that (i) the representations and warranties of the Company in the Investment Agreement that are qualified by materiality or material adverse effect must be true and correct and all representations and warranties which are not so qualified must be true and correct in all material respects, (ii) the performance by the Company in all material respects of all of its obligations in the Investment Agreement, (iii) no material adverse effect has occurred and (iv) all consents and approvals required to effect the Equity Investment have been obtained, among others.

 

The obligations of the Company to complete the Proposed Transaction are also subject to the satisfaction or waiver of certain conditions, including that (i) the representations and warranties of each Investor in the Investment Agreement that are qualified by materiality must be true and correct and all representations and warranties which are not so qualified must be true and correct in all material respects and (ii) the performance by the Investors in all material respects of all of their obligations under the Investment Agreement.

 

Termination of the Investment Agreement (Page 52)

 

The Company and JPE may agree in writing to terminate the Investment Agreement at any time prior to completing the Equity Investment, even after the stockholders of the Company have voted on the Proposals. The Investment Agreement may also be terminated at any time prior to completing the Equity Investment in certain other circumstances, including by either JPE or the Company if the closing has not occurred on or before December 13, 2011, so long as the failure to complete the Equity Investment is not the result of the failure of the terminating party to comply with the terms of the Investment Agreement. The Investment Agreement may also be terminated at any time prior to stockholder approval of Proposals 1 through 5 (i) by JPE if the Board of Directors changes its recommendation to the stockholders regarding the Proposals and (ii) by the Company in order to enter into a definitive agreement to consummate a “superior acquisition proposal”.

 

Termination Fee and Expenses (Page 53)

 

Upon termination of the Investment Agreement in connection with a “superior proposal” and certain other circumstances described in the Investment Agreement, the Company may be obligated to pay JPE a termination fee equal either to $2,249,000 or $2,774,000, determined as provided in the Investment Agreement. In addition, in the event the closing occurs or the Investment Agreement is terminated in certain specified circumstances, the Company will be obligated to reimburse up to $1,000,000 of expenses of JPE. JPE is obligated under the Investment Agreement to reimburse the Company for fees paid by the Company to KPMG LLP in certain circumstances.

 

Preferred Stock Certificate of Designation (Page 55)

 

Pursuant to the Investment Agreement, the Company has agreed to file the Certificate of Designation of Series A Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock of Express-1 Expedited Solutions, Inc. (the “Certificate of Designation”) with respect to the Preferred Stock, which sets forth the rights, designations and preferences of the Preferred Stock.

 

The Warrants (Page 57)

 

Pursuant to the Investment Agreement, the Company has agreed to issue warrant certificates with respect to the Warrants (each, a “Warrant Certificate”), which will govern the terms of the Warrants.

 

Registration Rights Agreement (Page 58)

 

Pursuant to the Investment Agreement, the Company has agreed to enter into a Registration Rights Agreement concurrently with the closing. The Registration Rights Agreement provides the Investors with certain rights to cause the Company to register the shares of Preferred Stock, the Warrants and shares of Company common stock issued or issuable upon conversion of the Preferred Stock or upon exercise of the Warrants.

 

Market Price of Our Stock (Page 60)

 

The Company common stock is traded on the NYSE Amex under the trading symbol “XPO”. On June 13, 2010, which was the last trading day before we entered into the Investment Agreement, the closing price of the Company common stock was $2.19 per share. On August 3, 2011, which was the last trading day before this proxy statement was mailed, the closing price of the Company common stock was $3.36 per share.

 

This proxy statement and the documents incorporated by reference herein contain forward-looking statements. Statements that are not historical facts, including statements about beliefs or expectations, are forward-looking statements. These statements are based on plans, estimates and projections at the time the statements are made, and readers should not place undue reliance on them. In some cases, readers can identify forward-looking statements by the use of forward-looking terms such as “may,” “will,” “should”, “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terms. Forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties and readers are cautioned that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described in this proxy statement and the documents incorporated by reference herein include, among others: uncertainties as to the timing of the Equity Investment; the possibility that competing transaction proposals will be made; the possibility that various closing conditions for the Equity Investment may not be satisfied or waived; the possibility that the Warrants, if issued, will not be exercised; general economic and business conditions; the possibility that the Company may be unable to identify suitable acquisition candidates or otherwise execute its business plan after closing; and other factors. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements included in this proxy statement and the documents incorporated by reference herein, which speak only as of the date hereof or of the applicable incorporated document. Neither the Company nor any other person undertakes any obligation to update any of these statements in light of new information or future events. Some important factors (but not necessarily all factors) that could negatively affect our revenues, growth strategies, future profitability and operating results, or that otherwise could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in or implied by any forward-looking statement, include the following:

 

 

Express-1 Expedited Solutions, Inc.

 

The Company is a non-asset-based, third-party logistics services provider that uses a network of relationships with ground, sea and air carriers to find the best transportation solutions for its customers. The Company offers its services through three distinct business units: Express-1, Inc. (expedited transportation solutions), the fifth largest U.S. expedited freight service provider, according to The Journal of Commerce; Concert Group Logistics, Inc. (domestic and international freight forwarding); and Bounce Logistics, Inc. (premium truckload brokerage). The Company serves more than 4,000 retail, commercial, manufacturing and industrial customers through six U.S. operations centers and 22 agent locations. In 2010, the Company completed more than 144,000 transactions for customers and generated revenues of approximately $158 million. Our principal executive office is located at 3399 South Lakeshore Drive, Suite 225, Saint Joseph, Michigan 49085. Our telephone number is (269) 429-9761. More information about the Company may be found in the documents we file with the SEC. See “Where You Can Find Additional Information” on page 96.

 

Jacobs Private Equity, LLC

 

JPE was formed by Bradley Jacobs to make a substantial equity investment in a company with the potential for exceptional value creation. Since 1979, Bradley Jacobs has founded and led four highly successful companies, including two multi-billion dollar, publicly-traded corporations: United Rentals (NYSE: URI), the world’s largest equipment rental company, and United Waste Systems, which was sold in 1997 for $2.5 billion. As Chairman of United Rentals from 1997 through 2007, Jacobs grew the company to $3.9 billion in revenues, with more than 700 branch locations, 13,000 employees and a ranking as the 536th largest public corporation in America by Fortune magazine.

 

In 1989, Jacobs founded United Waste and built it into the fifth largest solid waste management business in North America. In 1987, he founded Hamilton Resources (UK) Ltd., a worldwide oil trading company that served major oil companies and oil-producing countries and generated annual revenues of approximately $1 billion. In 1979, he co-founded Amerex Oil Associates, Inc., creating one of the world’s largest oil brokerage firms, with an annual gross contract volume of approximately $4.7 billion. The mailing address of the principal executive offices of JPE is Jacobs Private Equity, LLC, 350 Round Hill Road, Greenwich, CT 06831. The telephone number is (203) 413-4000.

 

This proxy statement is being furnished to our stockholders as part of the solicitation of proxies by our Board of Directors for use at the special meeting that will be held in the Express-1, Inc. Training Center located at 441 Post Road, Buchanan, MI 49107, at 9:00 a.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on September 1, 2011.

 

The purpose of the special meeting is for our stockholders to consider and vote to approve the Proposals in connection with the Proposed Transaction. Our stockholders must approve each of Proposals 1 through 5 for the Proposed Transaction to occur. If our stockholders fail to approve any of Proposals 1 through 5, the Proposed Transaction will not occur and the Company name change will not be effectuated. This proxy statement and the enclosed form of proxy are first being mailed to our stockholders on or about August 4, 2011.

 

The holders of record of shares of Company common stock as of the close of business on August 1, 2011, the record date for the special meeting, are entitled to receive notice of, and to vote at, the special meeting. On the record date, there were 33,011,561 outstanding shares of Company common stock.

 

Holders representing a majority of the outstanding shares of Company common stock on August 1, 2011, represented in person or by proxy, will constitute a quorum for purposes of the special meeting. A quorum is necessary to hold the special meeting. For purposes of determining the presence of a quorum, abstentions will be included in determining the number of shares present and voting at the special meeting; however, broker non-votes will not be included in the number of shares present and voting at the special meeting. Any shares of common stock held in treasury by the Company or by any of its subsidiaries are not considered to be outstanding for purposes of determining a quorum. Once a share is represented at the special meeting, it will be counted for the purpose of determining a quorum at the special meeting and any adjournment or postponement of the special meeting. However, if a new record date is set for the adjourned special meeting, then a new quorum will have to be established.

 

Each outstanding share of Company common stock on August 1, 2011 entitles the holder to one vote at the special meeting. The issuance of the Securities (Proposal 1) and the adoption of the Plan (Proposal 5) require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock voting thereon at a meeting at which a quorum is present. The amendment to increase the number of authorized shares of Company common stock (Proposal 2), the amendment to give effect to the Reverse Stock Split (Proposal 3), the amendment to provide that vacancies on the Board of Directors shall be filled by the remaining directors or director (Proposal 4) and the amendment to effect the Company name change (Proposal 6) require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock outstanding at the close of business on the record date. The approval of the adjournment of the special meeting (Proposal 7) requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock present and entitled to vote at the special meeting, whether or not a quorum is present. Proposals 1 through 5 are conditioned on each other, and Proposal 6 is conditioned on Proposals 1 through 5. If the stockholders fail to approve any of Proposals 1 through 5, the Proposed Transaction will not occur and the Company name change will not be effectuated. In order for your shares of Company common stock to be included in the vote, you must vote your shares by completing, signing, dating and returning the enclosed proxy card or by voting by telephone or the internet in accordance with the instructions set forth on the proxy card, or by voting in person at the special meeting.

 

If your shares are held in “street name” by your broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee, you should instruct your broker or other nominee on how to vote your shares using the instructions provided by such broker or other nominee. If you have not received such voting instructions or require further information regarding such voting instructions, contact your broker or other nominee and they can give you directions on how to vote your shares. Absent specific voting instructions, brokers or other

nominees who hold shares of Company common stock in “street name” for customers are prevented by NYSE Amex rules from exercising voting discretion in respect of non-routine or contested matters. The Company expects that NYSE Amex will evaluate the Proposals to be voted on at the special meeting to determine whether each Proposal is a routine or non-routine matter. Shares not voted by a broker or other nominee because such broker or other nominee does not have instructions or cannot exercise discretionary voting power with respect to one or more Proposals are referred to as “broker non-votes”. Such broker non-votes may not be counted for the purpose of determining the presence of a quorum at the special meeting in the absence of a routine Proposal. In addition, because Proposals 2, 3, 4 and 6 require the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of Company common stock outstanding at the close of business on the record date, a broker non-vote with respect to any of Proposals 2, 3, 4 or 6 will have the same effect as a vote against such Proposal. Therefore, it is important that you instruct your broker or other nominee on how to vote your shares of Company common stock held in “street name” in accordance with the voting instructions provided by such broker or other nominee, because the failure of the Company’s stockholders to approve any of Proposals 1 through 5 will prevent the Company from consummating the Proposed Transaction.

 

Our directors and current executive officers have informed us that, as of the date of this proxy statement, they intend to vote all of their shares of Company common stock in favor of the approval of each of the Proposals with respect to the Proposed Transaction. In particular, each of Michael Welch, Chief Executive Officer and a director of the Company, and Daniel Para, an officer and director of the Company, have entered into voting agreements with JPE, pursuant to which they have agreed, in their capacities as stockholders of the Company and subject to the terms of such agreements, to, among other things, vote their shares of Company common stock in favor of the Proposals, and have granted JPE a proxy in respect of their shares of Company common stock in connection therewith. As of August 1, 2011, the record date for the special meeting, and excluding any shares issuable upon the exercise of currently outstanding options, our directors and current executive officers beneficially owned, in the aggregate, 4,289,917 shares of Company common stock, or collectively approximately 13.0% of the outstanding shares of Company common stock.

 

If you vote your shares of Company common stock by properly completing, signing, dating and returning the enclosed proxy card or by voting by telephone or the internet in accordance with the instructions set forth on the proxy card, your shares will be voted at the special meeting as you have indicated. If you vote by returning the enclosed proxy card and no instructions are indicated on your signed and dated proxy card, your shares of Company common stock will be voted “FOR” Proposals 1 through 6 (and, if necessary and appropriate, Proposal 7) at the special meeting.

 

Whether you attend the special meeting or not, you may revoke your proxy at any time before the vote is taken at the special meeting. You may do so by properly delivering a later-dated proxy either by mail, the internet or telephone or attending the special meeting in person and voting. You also may revoke your proxy by delivering a notice of revocation to the Company (Attention: Chief Executive Officer, 3399 South Lakeshore Drive, Suite 225, Saint Joseph, Michigan 49085) prior to the vote at the special meeting.

 

If you have instructed your broker, dealer, commercial bank, trust company or other nominee to vote your shares, the above-described options for revoking your proxy do not apply and instead you must follow the directions provided by such broker or other nominee to change these instructions.

 

The Company does not expect that any matter other than the Proposals will be brought before the special meeting. If, however, such a matter is properly presented at the special meeting or any adjournment or postponement of the special meeting, the persons appointed as proxies will have discretionary authority to vote the shares represented by duly executed proxies in accordance with their discretion and judgment only with respect to routine and uncontested matters. No such discretionary authority to vote such shares will exist with respect to non-routine or contested matters pursuant to NYSE Amex rules and applicable law.

 

The Company will pay the cost of this proxy solicitation, other than the fees and expenses of Innisfree, which will be paid by JPE. In addition to soliciting proxies by mail, directors, officers and employees of the Company may solicit proxies personally and by telephone, facsimile or other electronic means of

communication. These persons will not receive additional or special compensation for such solicitation services. The Company will, upon request, reimburse brokers, dealers, commercial banks, trust companies or other nominees for their expenses in sending proxy materials to their customers who are beneficial owners and obtaining their voting instructions. JPE has retained Innisfree to assist in the solicitation of proxies for the special meeting and will pay Innisfree a fee not to exceed $25,000, plus reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses.

 

Representatives of KPMG LLP, the principal independent registered public accountant for the Company for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2011, are not expected to be present at the special meeting. Representatives of Pender Newkirk & Company LLP, the principal independent registered public accountant for the Company for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2010, are not expected to be present at the special meeting.

 

Although it is not expected, the special meeting may be adjourned or postponed for the purpose of soliciting additional proxies. Any adjournment or postponement may be made without notice, other than by an announcement made at the special meeting, by approval of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Company common stock present in person or represented by proxy at the special meeting, whether or not a quorum exists. Any signed proxies received by the Company will be voted in favor of an adjournment or postponement in these circumstances. Any adjournment or postponement of the special meeting for the purpose of soliciting additional proxies will allow Company stockholders who have already sent in their proxies to revoke them at any time prior to their use.

 

On June 13, 2011, the Company entered into the Investment Agreement with JPE and the other Investors party thereto, providing for an aggregate investment by the Investors of up to $150,000,000 in cash in the Company, including amounts payable upon exercise of the Warrants. Up to an aggregate of $135,000,000 of such investment will be made by JPE. The Investment Agreement has been approved by the Company’s Board of Directors, acting upon the unanimous recommendation of a special committee composed of independent directors. Following the closing of the Proposed Transaction, JPE will be the controlling stockholder of the Company, and Bradley Jacobs, the Managing Member of JPE, will become Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Company. Mr. Jacobs will also become the Company’s Chief Executive Officer following the closing.

 

Under the terms of the Investment Agreement, the Investors will invest $75,000,000 in cash into the Company in exchange for 75,000 shares of Preferred Stock and 42,857,143 Warrants exercisable into one share each of Company common stock. The Preferred Stock will have an initial liquidation preference of $1,000 per share, for an aggregate initial liquidation preference of $75,000,000. The Preferred Stock will be convertible at any time, in whole or in part and from time to time, at the option of the holder thereof into a number of shares of Company common stock equal to the then-applicable liquidation preference divided by the conversion price, which will initially be $1.75 per share of Company common stock (before giving effect to the contemplated Reverse Stock Split, and subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments), for an effective initial aggregate conversion rate of 42,857,143 shares of Company common stock. The Preferred Stock will pay quarterly cash dividends equal to the greater of (i) the “as-converted” dividends on the underlying Company common stock for the relevant quarter and (ii) 4% per annum of the then-applicable liquidation preference. Accrued and unpaid dividends for any completed quarter will accrete to liquidation preference for all purposes. The Preferred Stock is not redeemable or subject to any required offer to purchase, and will vote together with the Company’s common stock on an “as-converted” basis on all matters, except as otherwise required by law, and separately as a class with respect to certain matters implicating the rights of holders of shares of Preferred Stock. The terms of the Preferred Stock are more fully set forth in Exhibit A to the Investment Agreement, which is filed herewith as Annex A and incorporated by reference herein.

 

Each Warrant will initially be exercisable at any time and from time to time from the closing date until the tenth anniversary of the closing date, at the option of the holder thereof, into one share of Company common stock at an initial exercise price of $1.75 in cash per share of Company common stock (before giving effect to the contemplated Reverse Stock Split, and subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments). The initial aggregate number of shares of Company common stock subject to Warrants will be 42,857,143 shares. The terms of the Warrants are more fully set forth in Exhibit B to the Investment Agreement, which is filed herewith as Annex A and incorporated by reference herein.

 

Upon the closing of the Equity Investment, the Board of Directors will be reconstituted such that: (i) there will be eight Board members, (ii) one of such directors will be James Martell, our current Chairman, (iii) seven of such directors will be designated by JPE (including Bradley Jacobs), (iv) each standing committee of the Board will be reconstituted in a manner reasonably acceptable to JPE and (v) Bradley Jacobs will become the Chairman of the Board. After giving effect to the reconstitution of the Board of Directors, a majority of the members of the Board will continue to be independent.

 

In addition to the Equity Investment, the Proposed Transaction contemplates: (i) an amendment to the Company Certificate to increase the number of authorized shares of Company common stock to 150,000,000 shares; (ii) an amendment to the Company Certificate to give effect to the Reverse Stock Split; (iii) an amendment to the Company Certificate providing that any vacancy on our Board of Directors shall be filled by the remaining directors or director (consistent with our existing by-laws as currently in effect); and (iv) implementation of the Plan.

 

As controlling stockholder, JPE intends to leverage the Company’s prominent positions in expedited transportation solutions, freight brokerage and freight forwarding to make the Company a platform for growth, with a view to building a multi-billion dollar market leader. JPE intends to grow the Company organically and through multiple strategic acquisitions.

 

Bradley Jacobs, the Managing Member of JPE, has extensive experience growing companies in fragmented industries. Since 1979, he has founded and led four highly successful companies, including two multi-billion dollar, publicly-traded corporations: United Rentals, the world’s largest equipment rental company, and United Waste Systems, which was sold for $2.5 billion. Mr. Jacobs co-founded United Rentals in 1997 to capitalize on the early-stage consolidation opportunities in the construction equipment rental industry in North America. As chairman of United Rentals from 1997 through 2007, Mr. Jacobs grew the company to $3.9 billion in revenues. Mr. Jacobs oversaw the completion of over 400 acquisitions at United Rentals and United Waste Systems. In addition, he has been instrumental in raising more than $6 billion in the debt and equity markets since 1992.

 

The combined annual revenues of international freight forwarding and domestic freight brokerage companies are approximately $200,000,000,000. Of the over 10,000 licensed freight brokers in the industry, only a few dozen have revenues in excess of $200,000,000 per year. Given this size and fragmentation, JPE views the Company’s industry segments as a prime opportunity for consolidation and growth in market share. In addition, JPE intends to grow the Company organically by utilizing the increased access to capital markets, and reduced working capital constraints, that it expects to result from the Proposed Transaction.

 

JPE intends to cause the Company to pursue dynamic growth in the freight brokerage business though strategic acquisitions. JPE also intends to cause the Company to pursue robust internal growth through new hires.

 

In the freight forwarding business, JPE intends to generate additional growth at the Company by increasing the number of domestic agents (currently 22) by approximately 10 agents over the next several years. In addition, JPE intends to cause the Company to expand its presence in international freight forwarding by growing its existing owned operations in Florida by hiring additional personnel, and by acquiring additional international freight forwarding businesses both domestically and abroad and expanding those acquired companies organically by hiring additional personnel.

 

JPE intends to cause the Company to grow the expedited transportation solutions business in the near-term organically through accelerated recruiting of owner-operators and the hiring of additional sales and support personnel. In addition, JPE intends to cause the Company to pursue complimentary acquisitions on a selective basis.

 

The foregoing description of the post-closing business strategy of the Company includes forward-looking statements that are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties. See “Cautionary Statement Concerning Forward-Looking Information” on page 11 of this proxy statement.

 

Our Board of Directors and senior management periodically review the Company’s long-term strategic plan with the goal of maximizing stockholder value. As part of this ongoing process, the Board and senior management also have periodically reviewed strategic alternatives that may be available to the Company.

 

On April 19, 2010, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Directors, Michael Welch, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, presented management’s then current estimates for first quarter results and management’s then current outlook for the second quarter and full year performance to the Board. A discussion ensued regarding the Company’s financial and operational performance relative to the valuation placed on the Company by the public equity markets. The Board of Directors agreed that the market valuation of the Company, which had changed little over the last several years, failed to accurately reflect the Company’s financial and operational results. The Board of Directors concluded that industry research analysts were not

focusing on the Company and that the Company was not well positioned to attract the interest of institutional investors, principally because of its size. The Board resolved to have preliminary discussions with investment bankers to determine if other strategic alternatives were available to the Company that would provide more value to the Company’s stockholders.

 

Over the ensuing 30 days, members of the Board of Directors discussed the Company’s financial and operational performance with a number of investment banks. Based on those discussions, James Martell, the Chairman of the Board, contacted Calvin “Pete” Whitehead, Jennifer H. Dorris and John F. Affleck-Graves, each of whom is independent under the rules of the NYSE Amex, and requested that they, as a special committee of the Board of Directors, take additional steps to analyze the Company’s business and outlook, industry positioning and potential strategic planning and alternatives, and to formally interview investment banks to serve as financial advisors to the special committee. On May 27, 2010, Mr. Whitehead, Mrs. Dorris and Mr. Affleck-Graves held an initial meeting via teleconference to discuss the foregoing.

 

On June 8, 2010, the special committee and Roetzel & Andress, L.P.A., the Company’s outside legal counsel (“R&A”), interviewed BB&T Capital Markets, a division of Scott & Stringfellow, LLC (“BB&T”), and on June 9, 2010, interviewed Eve Partners, LLC (“Eve”). Each investment bank was seeking to act as financial advisor to the special committee. The investment banks discussed the Company’s current financial and operational performance, the Company’s valuation and stock price challenges despite the Company’s long-term track record of revenue and profit growth, and their knowledge of the Company’s business sector. The investment banks presented a variety of strategic alternatives to the special committee, including a potential sale of the Company or an equity capital raise transaction, to help address these issues. The investment banks also discussed possible outcomes and responded to the special committee’s questions.

 

On June 9, 2010, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Directors attended by R&A, Mr. Whitehead presented to the Board of Directors a summary of the meetings between the special committee and the investment banks. The Board of Directors discussed its knowledge of BB&T and Eve, the involvement of BB&T and Eve in the transportation industry, transactions in which BB&T or Eve had provided consulting services and the ability of BB&T and Eve to assist the Company with an in-depth analysis of all possible strategic alternatives. Thereafter the Board of Directors formally set forth the mandate of the special committee and adopted a Charter of the Special Committee. The Board of Directors delegated to the special committee full power and authority in connection with its evaluation of strategic alternatives, including full power and authority to (i) formulate, establish, oversee and direct a process for the identification, evaluation and negotiation of a potential sale of the Company, (ii) evaluate and negotiate the terms of any proposed definitive or other agreements in respect of a potential sale of the Company, (iii) make recommendations to the Board in respect of any potential transaction, including, but not limited to, any recommendation to not proceed with or to recommend that the Company’s stockholders reject a potential sale of the Company and (iv) make recommendations to the Board of Directors that the Board of Directors take other actions or consider other matters that the special committee deems necessary or appropriate with respect to any potential sale of the Company or potential strategic transactions.

 

Later on June 9, 2010, after considering the presentations made by each investment bank, including their respective qualifications, reputation and experience, the special committee elected to engage BB&T and Eve to serve jointly as financial advisors to the special committee.

 

Over the following three weeks, the special committee, R&A, BB&T and Eve communicated several times to discuss the fiduciary duties of the special committee and the Board of Directors, the potential risks and benefits involved in the execution of the Company’s business plan as an independent company, strategic alternatives available to the Company, and the process of identifying parties interested in engaging in a strategic transaction with the Company. Ultimately it was determined that the special committee, through BB&T and Eve, would conduct a controlled process with the goal of effecting a go-private sale of the Company.

 

On June 30, 2010, a kick-off meeting was held among Mr. Whitehead, BB&T, Eve and the Company’s executive management team. The parties discussed due diligence, process, strategy, timing and the universe of

financial and strategic buyers that might be interested in engaging in a transaction with the Company. Later that day the Company’s stock price closed at $1.26 per share of Company common stock.

 

Over the ensuing six weeks, BB&T and Eve conducted extensive due diligence on the Company, assisted the Company in the preparation of financial projections, established an electronic data site populated with Company due diligence materials and prepared and finalized a Confidential Information Memorandum and a buyers list.

 

On August 23, 2010, BB&T and Eve began contacting 51 prospective acquirors. Throughout the remainder of August and early September the special committee negotiated and entered into nondisclosure agreements with 39 interested parties. The agreements contained customary restrictions on the disclosure and use of confidential information, standstill provisions restricting the prospective acquirors’ ability to purchase our securities or engage in other takeover activities without our consent, and certain nonsolicitation provisions. Upon execution of the nondisclosure agreement the prospective acquirors were given the Company’s Confidential Information Memorandum and information on the process going forward.

 

By September 24, 2010, BB&T and Eve had received six initial indications of interest (each, an “IOI”) for the Company, with prices ranging from $1.59 to $2.50 per share of Company common stock. Each IOI was subject to certain stated assumptions and to further due diligence.

 

From October 5, 2010 through October 12, 2010, Company management, BB&T and Eve conducted management presentations with the five prospective acquirors that had submitted IOIs with the highest per share consideration. The prospective acquirors were granted access to the Company’s electronic data room. On October 12, 2010, the Company’s stock price closed at $2.35 per share of Company common stock.

 

On October 20, 2010, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Directors attended by R&A, BB&T and Eve, Mr. Whitehead updated the Board of Directors on the status of the strategic process being conducted by BB&T and Eve. A discussion ensued regarding the process timeline, feedback received regarding the management presentations and the recent increase in the Company’s stock price. R&A discussed the Board’s and special committee’s fiduciary duties at length. The Board members evaluated the IOIs received relative to the option of the Company to continue as an independent publicly-traded company, and the Board members asked questions of BB&T and Eve. The Board and the special committee determined that it was appropriate to continue the strategic process. Mr. Affleck-Graves was removed from the special committee at his request, due to his stated concern that his indirect business associations with one of more of the potential acquirors might be perceived as adversely affecting his independence in the strategic process.

 

On October 28, 2010, BB&T and Eve received two letters of intent (each, an “LOI”), and on October 29, 2010, BB&T and Eve received a third LOI, setting forth offers to acquire the Company for prices ranging from $2.26 per share to $2.70 per share. The following day the Company’s stock price closed at $2.45 per share.

 

On November 8, 2010, at a special meeting of the Board of Directors attended by BB&T and Eve in person and by R&A telephonically, BB&T and Eve presented a summary of the three LOIs received, including an analysis of total consideration to stockholders, transaction multiples and premiums, key valuation and financing terms, key process terms, key legal terms and sources and uses of the transaction consideration.

 

During the following week the potential acquirors conducted extensive due diligence on the Company, and BB&T and Eve held several discussions with each acquiror in an effort to convince each acquiror to increase the price per share set forth in their respective LOI. Ultimately the potential acquirors with the lowest per share purchase prices dropped out of the bidding, leaving one final potential acquiror.

 

On November 16, 2010, the Company’s stock price closed at $2.59 per share. The remaining potential acquiror notified BB&T and Eve that it intended to stand still until early 2011.

 

On December 9, 2010, BB&T and Eve introduced JPE and its principal Bradley Jacobs to the special committee. Based on Mr. Jacobs’ track record of successfully growing businesses, the special committee expressed interest in exploring Mr. Jacobs’ business strategy of rapidly building a multi-billion dollar logistics company using the Company as a platform.

On December 15, 2010, JPE executed a confidentiality agreement with the Company and received access to the Company’s electronic data room.

 

On January 20, 2011, Michael Welch met with Mr. Jacobs and discussed generally the Company and Mr. Jacobs’ business strategy.

 

On February 23, 2011, the remaining potential acquiror notified BB&T and Eve that it continued to evaluate a strategic transaction with the Company, but that the potential acquiror was not prepared to move forward at that time.

 

On February 28, 2011, BB&T advised the special committee that JPE was going to stand still until further notice.

 

On March 1, 2011, at a meeting of the Board of Directors, the special committee discussed the current status of the strategic process and that both remaining potential acquirors were currently on hold, and it was decided to suspend the strategic process. BB&T and Eve were advised of the special committee’s decision.

 

On April 15, 2011, a conference call was held to discuss JPE’s renewed interest in the Company. Participating on the call were Mr. Martell, Michael Welch, John Welch, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Whitehead and R&A. The parties discussed JPE, Mr. Jacobs and the Company’s financial and operational performance. Mr. Whitehead agreed to convene the special committee to re-open the strategic process that had been put on hold on March 1, 2011, and to conduct additional diligence on JPE and Mr. Jacobs.

 

On April 18, 2011, JPE submitted a nonbinding term sheet outlining a private investment in the Company of up to $150,000,000. The proposal involved the purchase of $75,000,000 in liquidation preference of convertible preferred stock, convertible at the holder’s option into 45,454,545 shares of Company common stock at $1.65 per share, subject to adjustment. The preferred stock carried a dividend, payable in cash, at the greater of 1.00% of liquidation preference per quarter and the “as-converted” dividends on the underlying shares of Company common stock for the relevant quarter. The preferred stock would vote on an as-converted basis with the Company common stock. Additionally, the investors would receive warrants to purchase 45,454,545 shares of Company common stock at an exercise price of $1.65 per share with a term of 10 years. The securities would be purchased in two stages. In stage one, on the date of the execution of an investment agreement, the Company would issue to JPE, and JPE would purchase for cash, (i) shares of convertible preferred stock convertible into a number of shares of Company common stock equal to 9.95% of the number of shares of Company common stock outstanding immediately prior to such issuance, and (ii) warrants to purchase a number of shares of Company common stock equal to 9.95% of the number of shares of Company common stock outstanding immediately prior to such issuance. The stage one purchase was to be made for a portion of the $75,000,000 that corresponded to the portion of the total convertible preferred stock issued in stage one. In stage two, subject to and as soon as practicable following the approval by the stockholders of the Company of the remaining equity issuances contemplated by the investment agreement, the Company would issue to JPE, and JPE would purchase for cash, (i) the balance of the shares of convertible preferred stock remaining to be issued after stage one and (ii) the balance of the warrants remaining to be issued after stage one. The stage two purchase was to be made for the balance of the $75,000,000 remaining following the investment in stage one. At the closing of stage two, the Board of Directors would be reconstituted in its entirety with individuals acceptable to JPE, and the Board would appoint Mr. Jacobs as the Chairman of the Board of the Company. JPE would have Board representation rights in its capacity as a holder of shares of convertible preferred stock.

 

On April 20, 2011, a conference call was held to discuss the JPE proposal. Participating on the call were Mr. Whitehead, Mrs. Dorris, Mr. Martell, Michael Welch, BB&T and R&A. BB&T presented the terms of the JPE proposal to the participants, discussed the market for PIPE transactions in detail, and provided a background of Mr. Jacobs and his prior business dealings at United Rentals, Inc. and United Waste Systems, Inc. The special committee expressed concern over the two stage aspect of the proposal under which JPE would receive an estimated 17% interest in the Company (making JPE the Company’s largest stockholder), and the Company would have material contractual obligations to JPE, in each case without having received

stockholder approval. Questions were also raised regarding JPE’s intended use of proceeds. Ms. Dorris requested that BB&T provide an analysis of change of control PIPE transactions not involving financial institutions or negative EBITDA companies. The special committee directed BB&T to discuss its concerns with JPE.

 

On April 28, 2011, Eve advised the special committee that, upon advice of counsel, it had elected to waive its rights under the Eve engagement letter with respect to the potential transaction with JPE, to avoid any potential conflict of interest that could potentially arise as a result of Eve’s ongoing involvement with JPE in connection with other M&A transactions. From that point forward Eve ceased participating in the Company’s strategic process.

 

On May 2, 2011, a meeting between the Company and JPE was held to provide JPE with an opportunity to present its business plan to the Company. Present were all members of the Board of Directors (Mr. Affleck-Graves participated telephonically), John Welch, representatives of BB&T, Mr. Jacobs, a representative of JPE’s outside legal advisor Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP (“Cravath”), representatives of JPE’s outside financial advisors Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. and UBS Investment Bank, and R&A (telephonically). During the meeting Mr. Jacobs discussed his personal and business background, the details of his proposed investment in the Company and his intended use of proceeds. At the conclusion of the presentation the parties agreed that if the transaction were to go forward it would be in the form of a single stage investment that would close only upon receipt of stockholder approval. The Board of Directors and its advisors continued to discuss the JPE proposal after Mr. Jacobs and his advisors left the meeting. The parties discussed the fiduciary duties of the Board of Directors. It was agreed that the JPE proposal had potential merit, but that the potential dilution to the Company’s stockholders was a significant concern and that the effective price per Company common share needed to be increased.

 

On May 4, 2011, Mr. Affleck-Graves accepted a re-appointment as a member of the special committee. BB&T provided the special committee with a written analysis summarizing the premiums/discounts of other PIPE transactions and follow-on offerings in which the offering size was greater than the pre-money market capitalization of the issuing company. The special committee asked BB&T for its view on the ability of the Company to raise funds through a PIPE offering, registered direct offering or other follow-on offering.

 

On May 6, 2011, the special committee and R&A met via conference call. R&A presented a detailed description of the Board of Directors’ fiduciary duties in change of control transactions. The parties discussed the terms of the JPE proposal, Mr. Jacobs’ commitment to the Company’s industry and the obligations of the special committee and the Board to the Company’s stockholders. The special committee agreed that additional information was needed before it could determine whether to continue discussions with JPE. Specifically, the special committee requested that BB&T prepare an analysis of the following strategic alternatives available to the Company: (i) continue as a stand-alone entity, growing organically; (ii) continue as a stand-alone entity, with both organic growth and growth through acquisitions; (iii) sell the Company in a go-private transaction to either a financial or a strategic buyer; and (iv) accept the JPE proposal.

 

On May 9, 2011, BB&T provided the special committee and R&A with a written analysis of the four strategic alternatives requested by the special committee. The analysis described in detail each strategic alternative and the projected Company stock price through 2015. The JPE proposal resulted in the highest projected stock price in each year of the analysis. Members of the special committee and R&A discussed the report over the following several days. The special committee agreed to proceed with the JPE proposal to the extent JPE would agree to increase the effective price from $1.65 per share to $1.75 per share.

 

On May 13, 2011, JPE submitted a revised term sheet providing for a single stage transaction in which the transaction would not close until stockholder approval was received (and other customary closing conditions were satisfied). The price was increased to $1.75 per share. In consideration for the concessions, JPE required that the Company agree to a no-shop provision. The special committee, after consultation with R&A regarding the Company’s ability to receive third-party proposals during a no-shop period, agreed to pursue a transaction on the general terms set forth in the revised term sheet. BB&T communicated this to JPE and a timeline for in-depth due diligence was agreed upon.

On May 20, 2011 and May 21, 2011, Mr. Whitehead and R&A conducted telephone interviews with two financial advisory firms regarding the preparation and issuance of a fairness opinion.

 

During the week of May 23, 2011, JPE’s accounting advisors, KPMG LLP (“KPMG”), conducted extensive due diligence on the Company, primarily at the offices of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm Pender Newkirk & Company LLP.

 

On May 23, 2011, Cravath presented R&A with the initial draft of the investment agreement, which R&A forwarded to the special committee and to BB&T.

 

On May 24, 2011, after considering the presentations made by each financial advisory firm, including their respective qualifications, reputation and experience, the special committee engaged Ladenburg to render an opinion to the special committee as to whether, on the date of such opinion, the consideration to be received by the Company in connection with the JPE transaction is fair, from a financial point of view, to the Company’s stockholders.

 

On May 25, 2011, R&A presented the special committee with a memo summarizing the material terms of the investment agreement and R&A’s proposed revisions thereto. The following day a conference call was held between the special committee and R&A to discuss R&A’s proposed revisions to the investment agreement. The primary areas of concern were the Company’s inability to terminate the agreement upon receipt of a superior proposal, the ability to treat as a superior proposal offers to acquire a majority of the Company but less than all or substantially all of the Company, the Company’s obligation to reimburse JPE for all of JPE’s transaction-related costs and expenses, the amount of the termination fee, the length of the tail period during which, in certain circumstances, the Company would be obligated to pay the termination fee, the requirement that the Company engage KPMG to conduct a re-audit of the Company’s financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2009 and 2010, and to conduct a full internal control over financial reporting audit, the inclusion of a cashless exercise feature in the warrants, and the right of JPE to nominate persons to fill 80% of the seats on the Board of Directors as long as JPE holds at least 50% of the equity securities purchased by JPE in the transaction. After R&A’s presentation the parties discussed the Board of Directors’ fiduciary duties to the Company’s stockholders and the impact certain of the proposed terms would have on the special committee’s ability to maximize stockholder value. The special committee directed R&A to negotiate the proposed revisions to the investment agreement directly with Cravath.

 

On May 27, 2011, R&A and Cravath discussed the proposed revisions to the investment agreement. As a result of those discussions, JPE agreed to allow the Company to terminate the investment agreement upon receipt of a superior proposal to acquire all or substantially all of the Company, but only in the event the Company concurrently entered into an agreement with the third party to effectuate the superior proposal, to decrease the termination fee from 3.5% of the Company’s equity value to 3.0%, and to eliminate the cashless exercise feature from the warrants. Left as open issues were the amount of JPE expenses to be reimbursed by the Company, JPE’s ability to nominate directors and the Company’s obligation to engage KPMG for a re-audit of the Company’s financial statements and an audit of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. JPE rejected the Company’s request to be able to treat as a superior proposal a takeover proposal for the acquisition of less than all or substantially all of the Company.

 

On May 28, 2011 and May 29, 2011, the special committee and R&A discussed the outstanding issues under the investment agreement and related transaction documents. The parties agreed the following revisions should be requested: that the Company would have no obligation to reimburse JPE’s expenses in the event of a stockholder “no” vote or if the Company were to terminate the investment agreement as a result of a JPE breach, that the Company would agree to engage KPMG for the re-audits for 2009 and 2010, but not for an audit of internal control over financial reporting, the elimination of JPE’s ability to nominate persons to serve on the Board, that Daniel Para, the Chief Executive Officer of Concert Group Logistics, Inc., and Michael Welch should be able to terminate their voting agreements with JPE in the event of a superior proposal (whether or not the investment agreement was terminated), and that the Company should be able to treat as a superior proposal a takeover proposal to acquire a majority of the Company but less than all or substantially all of the Company. The Company also requested a reduction in the term of the warrants from 10 years to one year.

On May 30, 2011, R&A and Cravath discussed the proposed revisions to the investment agreement. During the discussions Cravath advised of JPE’s estimate that the JPE expenses subject to Company reimbursement would be approximately $1.5 million and JPE’s agreement to eliminate the reimbursement requirement should JPE breach the investment agreement. JPE maintained that JPE’s expenses should be reimbursed in the event of a stockholder “no” vote. The negotiation of JPE’s nomination rights continued. JPE again rejected R&A’s request that the Company be able to treat as a superior proposal certain takeover proposals involving offers for a majority of the Company but less than all or substantially all of the Company.

 

On May 31, 2011, Mr. Whitehead and R&A discussed the status of negotiations and agreed to present JPE with a set of terms that would resolve all of the outstanding issues. The Company was willing to withdraw its request that the term of the warrants be reduced to one year, was willing to accept the payment of JPE’s expenses up to a cap of $1.5 million and was willing to provide JPE the right to nominate a majority of the Board as long as JPE holds at least 33% of the Company’s voting rights and 25% of the Board as long as JPE holds at least 20% of the Company’s voting rights. The Company maintained its position that a superior proposal should include proposals to acquire a majority of the Company.

 

On May 31, 2011, R&A and Cravath discussed the Company’s proposal during a series of conference calls. The following day Cravath distributed revised transaction documents evidencing the foregoing.

 

In the evening of June 1, 2011, the special committee met with R&A to discuss the status of negotiations with JPE and Ladenburg’s fairness opinion. Immediately thereafter the Board of Directors held a meeting attended by all Board members, R&A, BB&T and John Welch. Mr. Martell recused himself from the meeting after being advised that JPE was interested in having Mr. Martell remain on the Board post-closing, and that if Mr. Martell desired, JPE would extend to Mr. Martell an opportunity to invest in the JPE transaction along with JPE and the other investors. Mr. Whitehead began the meeting with a general status update of the special committee’s negotiations with JPE and Cravath. Next, R&A presented a detailed description of all material terms of the JPE transaction documents as then drafted. In so doing R&A identified all outstanding issues, and provided a background of the negotiations that had transpired over the prior week. The Board deliberated over the terms of the transaction, and R&A discussed with the Board the Board’s fiduciary duties. The Board expressed its desire that the Company’s obligation to pay JPE’s expenses, and to pay a termination fee, be limited to the greatest extent possible. Further, the Board supported the special committee’s position that it should be able to terminate the investment agreement if it receives a superior proposal to acquire a majority (but less than all or substantially all) of the Company. After the Board meeting was adjourned, a series of conference calls were conducted between R&A and Cravath during which R&A conveyed the special committee’s position on the outstanding issues.

 

On June 3, 2011, the special committee held a conference call with R&A to discuss the status of negotiations with JPE. It was agreed that R&A and Cravath had reached an impasse, and that R&A would cease working on the JPE transaction unless and until the remaining issues were resolved. Mr. Whitehead directed BB&T to advise JPE of the foregoing, and to attempt to continue negotiations directly with Mr. Jacobs on the Company’s behalf. Mr. Whitehead advised BB&T that the special committee might be able to accept the inability to terminate the investment agreement upon receipt of a majority (but less than all or substantially all) superior proposal, as long as in connection therewith the voting agreements with Mr. Para and Michael Welch could be terminated. Mr. Whitehead also suggested that if JPE was willing to increase the pricing of the transaction the special committee would likely withdraw its remaining demands.

 

Over the next several days extensive negotiations took place between the special committee and its advisors and JPE and its advisors in an unsuccessful attempt to resolve the outstanding issues.

 

On June 7, 2011, the Board held a telephonic meeting in which R&A participated (Mr. Martell was not present). R&A provided an update on the outstanding issues. The Board suggested that Mike Welch attempt to resolve the outstanding issues directly with Mr. Jacobs. Following the meeting Mr. Welch and Mr. Jacobs had a telephone conference but were unable to resolve the outstanding issues.

On June 8, 2011, the special committee, through R&A, advised Cravath that if JPE was willing to limit the Company’s obligations to pay expenses and termination fees the proposed transaction could likely move forward.

 

On June 9, 2011, Cravath advised that JPE was willing to reduce the cap on the termination fee (which was equal to 3% of the post-announcement equity value) to 4.5% of pre-announcement equity value from 5% of pre-announcement equity value, and that the termination fee payable in any event other than the termination by the Company upon receipt of a superior proposal for all or substantially all of the Company, or by JPE due to a change in recommendation by the Company in connection with a superior proposal, would be limited to 3% of pre-announcement equity value.

 

Later on June 9, 2011, following the Company’s annual meeting of stockholders, Mr. Whitehead and Mrs. Dorris discussed the current status of negotiations with JPE. Still later that day the Board of Directors met via conference call (Mr. Martell was not present), during which R&A presented an outline of the Company’s obligations to pay JPE’s expenses and termination fees under the current draft of the investment agreement. A discussion ensued about the transaction generally and the concessions that had been obtained from JPE to date. At the conclusion of the meeting, the special committee contacted BB&T and directed BB&T to contact JPE and advise that if JPE would be willing to reduce the cap on reimbursable expenses from $1.5 million to $1 million, the special committee would be in a position to support the transaction and recommend it to the Board for approval.

 

On June 10, 2011, JPE advised that the reduction of the cap on reimbursable expenses from $1.5 million to $1 million was acceptable.

 

On June 12, 2011, the special committee held a telephonic meeting with R&A to discuss the final terms of the investment agreement and related documents. Immediately thereafter the Board of Directors held a telephonic meeting also attended by John Welch, R&A, BB&T and Ladenburg (Mr. Martell did not attend). R&A presented a summary of the terms of the investment agreement and related documents, and discussed the fiduciary duties of the members of the special committee and the Board. Next, Ladenburg reviewed with the Board Ladenburg’s financial analyses of the consideration and delivered to the Board an oral opinion, which opinion was confirmed by delivery of a written opinion, dated June 12, 2011, to the effect that, as of that date and based on and subject to various assumptions, matters considered and limitations described in its opinion, the transaction with JPE is fair, from a financial point of view, to the Company’s stockholders. Next, BB&T outlined the strategic alternatives available to the Company, and presented the Board with BB&T’s opinion that the Proposed Transaction with JPE represents a superior potential outcome for the Company’s stockholders relative to the other possible alternatives. The special committee, having deliberated regarding the terms of the Proposed Transaction, the Ladenburg presentation and opinion and the BB&T presentation, unanimously determined that the investment agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby are advisable and in the best interests of the Company and the Company’s stockholders, and recommended that the Board approve the investment agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, and that the Board recommend that the Company’s stockholders vote to approve the Equity Investment as set forth in the investment agreement, certain amendments to the Company’s certificate of incorporation as set forth in the investment agreement and the omnibus incentive compensation plan as set forth in the investment agreement. Following the special committee’s recommendation to the Board, the Board, by unanimous vote of those directors in attendance, determined that the investment agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby are advisable and in the best interests of the Company and the Company’s stockholders, and recommended that the Company’s stockholders vote to approve the Equity Investment as set forth in the investment agreement, certain amendments to the Company’s certificate of incorporation as set forth in the investment agreement and the omnibus incentive compensation plan as set forth in the investment agreement.

 

On June 13, 2011, the Company and JPE executed the investment agreement and other transaction documents, and Mr. Para and Michael Welch executed voting agreements.

 

On June 14, 2011, prior to the opening of the market, the Company and JPE issued a joint press release announcing the execution of the investment agreement, and filed a Form 8-K with the SEC describing the terms of the Transaction.

 

In reaching its determination, the special committee consulted with and received the advice of its financial and legal advisors, discussed certain issues with the Company’s senior management team, and considered a number of factors that it believed supported its decision to recommend that the Company enter into the Investment Agreement and consummate the Equity Investment, and recommend that the stockholders vote in favor of the Proposals, including, but not limited to, the following material factors:

 

 

 

 

 

The special committee also believed that sufficient procedural safeguards were and are present to ensure the fairness of the Proposed Transaction and to permit the special committee to represent effectively the interests of the Company’s stockholders. These procedural safeguards include:

 

 

 

 

 

In the course of its deliberations, the special committee also considered a variety of risks and other countervailing factors related to entering into the Proposed Transaction, including (not in any relative order of importance):

 

 

The foregoing discussion of the factors considered by the special committee is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather includes the principal factors considered by the special committee. The special committee collectively reached the conclusion to approve the Proposed Transaction, the Investment Agreement and the other transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement in light of the various factors described above and other factors that the members of the special committee believed were appropriate. In view of the wide variety of factors considered by the special committee in connection with its evaluation of the Proposed Transaction and the complexity of these matters, the special committee did not consider it practical, and did not attempt, to quantify, rank or otherwise assign relative weights to the specific factors it considered in reaching its decision and did not undertake to make any specific determination as to whether any particular factor, or any aspect of any particular factor, was favorable or unfavorable to the ultimate determination of the special committee. Rather, the special committee made its recommendation based on the totality of information presented to it and the investigation conducted by it. In considering the factors discussed above, individual members of the special committee may have given different weights to different factors.

 

After careful consideration, the Company’s Board of Directors (excluding Mr. Martell, who recused himself), acting upon the unanimous recommendation of the special committee of the Board of Directors:

 

 

 

 

Ladenburg made a presentation to our Board of Directors on June 12, 2011 and subsequently delivered its written opinion to the special committee of our Board of Directors. The opinion stated that, as of June 12, 2011, based upon and subject to the assumptions made, matters considered, procedures followed and limitations on Ladenburg’s review as set forth in the opinion, the Proposed Transaction is fair, from a financial point of view, to our stockholders. The financial terms and other terms of the Proposed Transaction were determined pursuant to negotiations between us, JPE and each of our respective advisors and not pursuant to any recommendation from Ladenburg.

 

The full text of Ladenburg’s written opinion dated as of June 12, 2011, which sets forth the assumptions made, matters considered, procedures followed, and limitations on the review undertaken by Ladenburg in rendering its opinion, is attached as Annex B to this proxy statement and is incorporated herein by reference. Ladenburg’s opinion is not intended to be, and does not constitute, a recommendation to you as to how you should vote or act with respect to the Proposed Transaction or any other matter relating thereto. The summary of the Ladenburg opinion set forth in this proxy statement is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of the opinion. We urge you to read the opinion carefully and in its entirety.

 

Ladenburg’s opinion is for the use and benefit of our Board of Directors in connection with its consideration of the Proposed Transaction. Ladenburg’s opinion may not be used by any other person or for any other purpose without Ladenburg’s prior written consent. Ladenburg’s opinion should not be construed as creating any fiduciary duty on its part to any party.

 

Ladenburg was not requested to opine as to, and its opinion does not address, the relative merits of the Proposed Transaction as compared to any alternative business strategy that might exist for us, whether we should complete the Proposed Transaction, and other alternatives to the Proposed Transaction that might exist for us. Ladenburg has not been retained to render an opinion as to whether the Proposed Transaction is the best reasonably available to us. Ladenburg does not express any opinion as to the underlying valuation or future performance of the Company or the price at which our securities might trade at any time in the future.

 

Ladenburg’s analysis and opinion are necessarily based upon market, economic and other conditions, as they existed on, and could be evaluated as of, June 12, 2011. Accordingly, although subsequent developments may affect its opinion, Ladenburg assumed no obligation to update, review or reaffirm its opinion to us or any other person.

 

In arriving at its opinion, Ladenburg took into account an assessment of general economic, market and financial conditions, as well as its experience in connection with similar transactions and securities valuations generally. In so doing, among other things, Ladenburg:

 

 

 

In arriving at its opinion, with our consent, Ladenburg relied upon and assumed, without assuming any responsibility for independent verification, the accuracy and completeness of all of the financial and other information that was supplied or otherwise made available to Ladenburg and Ladenburg further relied upon the assurances of our management that we were not aware of any facts or circumstances that would make any such information inaccurate or misleading. With respect to the financial information and the Projections reviewed, Ladenburg assumed that such information was reasonably prepared on a basis reflecting the best currently available estimates and judgments, and that such information provided a reasonable basis upon which it could make its analysis and form an opinion. The Projections were solely used in connection with the rendering of Ladenburg’s fairness opinion. Stockholders should not place reliance upon such Projections, as they are not necessarily an indication of what our revenues and profit margins will be in the future. The Projections were prepared by our management, JPE and BB&T and are not to be interpreted as projections of future performance (or “guidance”) by the Company.

 

Ladenburg assumed that the Proposed Transaction will be consummated in a manner that complies in all respects with applicable foreign, federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations. Ladenburg assumed, with our consent, that the final executed forms of the Investment Agreement, Certificate of Designation and Warrant Certificate do not differ in any material respect from the drafts Ladenburg reviewed and that the Proposed Transaction will be consummated on the terms set forth in the Investment Agreement, without further amendments thereto, and without waiver by the Company of conditions to any of its obligations thereunder or in the alternative that any such amendments or waivers thereto will not be detrimental to the Company or its stockholders in any material respect.

In connection with rendering its opinion, Ladenburg performed certain financial, comparative and other analyses as summarized below. Each of the analyses conducted by Ladenburg was carried out to provide a different perspective on the Proposed Transaction, and to enhance the total mix of information available. Ladenburg did not form a conclusion as to whether any individual analysis, considered in isolation, supported or failed to support its opinion. Further, the summary of Ladenburg’s analyses described below is not a complete description of the analyses underlying Ladenburg’s opinion. The preparation of a fairness opinion is a complex process involving various determinations as to the most appropriate and relevant methods of financial analysis and the application of those methods to the particular circumstances and, therefore, a fairness opinion is not readily susceptible to partial analysis or summary description. In arriving at its opinion, Ladenburg made qualitative judgments as to the relevance of each analysis and factors that it considered. Also, Ladenburg may have given various analyses more or less weight than other analyses, and may have deemed various assumptions more or less probable than other assumptions, so that the range of valuations resulting from any particular analysis described below should not be taken to be Ladenburg’s view of the value of our assets. The estimates contained in Ladenburg’s analyses and the ranges of valuations resulting from any particular analysis are not necessarily indicative of actual values or actual future results, which may be significantly more or less favorable than suggested by such analyses. Also, analyses relating to the value of businesses or assets neither purport to be appraisals nor do they necessarily reflect the prices at which businesses or assets may actually be sold. Accordingly, Ladenburg’s analyses and estimates are inherently subject to substantial uncertainty. Ladenburg believes that its analyses must be considered as a whole and that selecting portions of its analyses or the factors it considered, without considering all analyses and factors collectively, could create a misleading or incomplete view of the process underlying the analyses performed by Ladenburg in connection with the preparation of its opinion.

 

The summaries of the financial reviews and analyses include information presented in tabular format. To fully understand Ladenburg’s financial reviews and analyses, you must read the tables together with the accompanying text of each summary. The tables alone do not constitute a complete description of the financial analyses, including the methodologies and assumptions underlying the analyses, and if viewed in isolation could create a misleading or incomplete view of the financial analyses Ladenburg performed.

 

The analyses performed were prepared solely as part of Ladenburg’s analysis of the fairness of the Proposed Transaction to our stockholders from a financial point of view, and were provided to the special committee of our Board of Directors in connection with the delivery of Ladenburg’s opinion. Ladenburg’s opinion was just one of the several factors the special committee and our Board of Directors took into account in making its determination to approve the Proposed Transaction, including those described elsewhere in this proxy statement.

 

Analysis of Terms

 

Ladenburg analyzed 41 convertible preferred and common stock PIPEs and 34 follow-on offerings of U.S. traded companies since January 2008, where the shares issued in all transactions exceeded the shares outstanding at the time of the transaction and the transaction values were between $20 million and $1 billion. The analysis focused on the following terms:

 

 

Ladenburg noted that the security discount and the coupon of the Equity Investment are not outliers as compared to the universe of reviewed transactions and they do not appear unreasonable when compared to the terms of other transactions. However, Ladenburg noted that the warrant coverage and warrant discount are significantly higher than the mean and median of comparable transactions, particularly those of profitable companies.

 

 

Valuation Overview

 

Ladenburg reviewed three strategic alternatives deemed to be currently available for the Company and generated an indicated per share equity valuation range for each alternative.

 

The “Standalone” alternative assumed the Company continues on its current growth trajectory with no future acquisitions or capital raises. Ladenburg generated an indicated valuation range for this alternative based on comparable company analysis, comparable transaction analysis and discounted cash flow analyses, each as more fully discussed below. Ladenburg weighted the three approaches 60%, 20%, 20%, and arrived at an indicated equity value per share range of approximately $2.20 to approximately $2.60.

 

The “Standalone with Acquisitions” alternative assumed the Company completes one bolt-on acquisition every year (starting in 2012) and was based on the Standalone with Acquisitions Projections prepared by the Company and BB&T. Under this alternative, the Company would achieve accelerated growth and increased scale and thus command a higher EBITDA multiple at the end of the projection period (2015) than under the Standalone alternative. Ladenburg generated an indicated valuation range for this alternative based on discounting the projected 2015 share price of $8.81 by utilizing discount rates ranging from 19.5% to 20.5%, and arrived at an indicated equity value per share range of approximately $3.80 to approximately $3.90. For purposes of Ladenburg’s analyses, “EBITDA” means earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, as adjusted for add-backs for non-cash stock compensation expenses and one-time charges.

 

The “JPE PIPE” alternative assumed the Proposed Transaction takes place and the Company would raise additional capital subsequent to the Proposed Transaction to support acquisitions. This alternative was based on the JPE Projections prepared by JPE and BB&T and assumed that the Company, as a result of its significantly increased size, would command a higher EBITDA multiple at the end of the projection period (2015) than under the Standalone with Acquisitions alternative. Ladenburg generated an indicated valuation range for this alternative based on discounting the projected 2015 share price of $10.63 by utilizing discount rates ranging from 20.5% to 25.5%, and arrived at an indicated equity value per share range of approximately $3.80 to approximately $4.50.

 

Ladenburg noted that the indicated equity value per share range in the JPE PIPE alternative was higher than the indicated value ranges in the other two alternatives.

 

Standalone Comparable Company Analysis

 

A selected comparable company analysis reviews the trading multiples of publicly traded companies that are similar to the Company with respect to business and revenue model, operating sector, size and target customer base.

Ladenburg identified the following 13 companies that it deemed comparable to the Company with respect to their industry sector and operating model:

 

Large-Cap Comparables:

 

 

Mid-Cap Comparables:

 

 

Small-Cap Comparables:

 

 

Multiples utilizing enterprise value were used in the analyses. For comparison purposes, all operating profits including EBITDA were normalized to exclude unusual and extraordinary expenses and income. For purposes of Ladenburg’s analyses, “enterprise value” means equity value plus all interest-bearing debt less cash.

 

Ladenburg generated the following multiples worth noting with respect to the comparable companies:

 

 

The Company, from a size perspective, is most comparable to the Small-Cap Comparables. Ladenburg noted that the Small-Cap Comparables are less profitable than the Company, with EBITDA margins ranging from approximately 2.1% to 2.9%, compared with the Company’s approximately 6.2%. Further, the Small-Cap Comparables experienced lower growth than the Company, with one-year EBITDA growth average of 55.8%, compared with the Company’s approximately 68.4%. In addition, AutoInfo’s leverage is significantly higher than that of the Company.

 

Ladenburg selected an appropriate multiple range for the Company by examining the range indicated by the comparable companies and taking into account certain company-specific factors. Ladenburg selected multiples above the mean of the Small-Cap Comparable companies to reflect the Company’s higher growth and lower leverage. Based on the above factors, Ladenburg applied EBITDA multiples of 6.5x to 7.5x to the Company’s LTM EBITDA, and calculated a range of indicated enterprise values for the Company. Ladenburg then deducted net debt of approximately $2.0 million to derive a per share range of equity values of approximately $1.90 to approximately $2.30, based on approximately 34.0 million outstanding shares and in-the-money options/warrants utilizing the treasury stock method.

None of the comparable companies have characteristics identical to the Company. An analysis of publicly-traded comparable companies is not mathematical; rather it involves complex considerations and judgments concerning differences in financial and operating characteristics of the comparable companies and other factors that could affect the public trading of the comparable companies.

 

Standalone Comparable Transaction Analysis

 

A comparable transaction analysis involves a review of merger, acquisition and asset purchase transactions involving target companies that are in related industries to the Company. The comparable transaction analysis generally provides the widest range of values due to the varying importance of an acquisition to a buyer (i.e., a strategic buyer willing to pay more than a financial buyer) in addition to the potential differences in the transaction process (i.e., competitiveness among potential buyers).

 

Ladenburg located 25 transactions announced since January 2008 involving target companies providing freight transport and logistics services and for which financial information was available.

 

 

Based on the information disclosed with respect to the targets in each of the comparable transactions, Ladenburg calculated and compared the enterprise values as a multiple of LTM revenue and LTM EBITDA.

 

Ladenburg noted the following with respect to the multiples generated:

 

 

Ladenburg selected an appropriate multiple range for the Company by examining the range indicated by the comparable companies and taking into account certain company-specific factors. Based on the above

factors, Ladenburg applied EBITDA multiples of 7.0x to 8.0x to the Company’s LTM EBITDA, and calculated a range of indicated enterprise values for the Company. Ladenburg then deducted net debt of approximately $2.0 million to derive a per share range of equity values of approximately $2.10 to approximately $2.40, based on approximately 34.0 million outstanding shares and in-the-money options/warrants utilizing the treasury stock method.

 

None of the target companies in the comparable transactions have characteristics identical to the Company. Accordingly, an analysis of comparable business combinations is not mathematical; rather it involves complex considerations and judgments concerning differences in financial and operating characteristics of the target companies in the comparable transactions and other factors that could affect the respective acquisition values.

 

Standalone Discounted Cash Flow Analysis

 

A discounted cash flow analysis estimates value based upon a company’s projected future free cash flow discounted at a rate reflecting risks inherent in its business and capital structure. Unlevered free cash flow represents the amount of cash generated and available for principal, interest and dividend payments after providing for ongoing business operations.

 

While the discounted cash flow analysis is the most scientific of the methodologies used, it is dependent on projections and is further dependent on numerous industry-specific and macroeconomic factors.

 

Ladenburg utilized the Standalone Projections, which forecast a compound annual growth rate, or CAGR, of approximately 32.6% EBITDA growth from fiscal year, or FY, 2010 through FY2013, representing an EBITDA margin improvement from approximately 6.5% to approximately 8.4% and a revenue CAGR of approximately 21.8%.

 

To arrive at a present value, Ladenburg utilized discount rates ranging from 15.0% to 17.0%. This was based on an estimated weighted average cost of capital of 16.0% (based on an estimated weighted average cost of debt of 2.5% and 17.5% estimated cost of equity). The cost of equity calculation was derived utilizing the unlevered beta of the comparable companies, the appropriate equity risk and size premiums and a company specific risk factor, reflecting the risks associated with the Standalone Projections, including, but not limited to, achieving the projected revenue and EBITDA growth.

 

Ladenburg presented a range of terminal values at the end of the forecast period by applying a range of terminal exit multiples based on EBITDA as well as long term perpetual growth.

 

Utilizing terminal EBITDA multiples of between 5.5x and 6.5x and long term perpetual growth rates of between 4.5% and 5.5%, Ladenburg calculated a range of indicated enterprise values and then deducted net debt of approximately $2.0 million to derive a per share range of equity values of approximately $3.00 to approximately $3.80, based on approximately 34.0 million outstanding shares and in-the-money options/warrants utilizing the treasury stock method.

 

Conclusion

 

Based on the information and analyses set forth above, Ladenburg delivered its written opinion to the special committee of our Board of Directors, which stated that, as of June 12, 2011, based upon and subject to the assumptions made, matters considered, procedures followed and limitations on its review as set forth in the opinion, the Proposed Transaction is fair, from a financial point of view, to the Company’s stockholders.

 

As part of its investment banking business, Ladenburg regularly is engaged in the evaluation of businesses and their securities in connection with mergers, acquisitions, corporate restructurings, negotiated underwritings, private placements and for other purposes. We determined to use the services of Ladenburg because it is a recognized investment banking firm that has substantial experience in similar matters. Ladenburg has received a fee of $140,000, of which $90,000 was paid upon execution of the engagement letter and $40,000 was paid when Ladenburg notified the Company that Ladenburg was prepared to deliver the opinion. Ladenburg is also entitled to reimbursement for its reasonable expenses, including attorneys’ fees.

Also, we have agreed to indemnify Ladenburg and related persons and entities for certain liabilities that may relate to, or arise out of, its engagement. Further, Ladenburg has not previously provided, nor are there any pending agreements to provide, any other services to us.

 

In the ordinary course of business, Ladenburg, certain of Ladenburg’s affiliates, as well as investment funds in which Ladenburg or its affiliates may have financial interests, may acquire, hold or sell long or short positions, or trade or otherwise effect transactions in debt, equity and other securities and financial instruments (including bank loans and other obligations) of, or investments in, the Company or any other party that may be involved in the Proposed Transaction and their respective affiliates.

 

Set forth below is a table depicting the ownership of Company common stock upon the closing of the Proposed Transaction, based on the following assumptions (and without giving effect to the Reverse Stock Split):

 

 

 

 

The Company expects to use the proceeds of the Equity Investment primarily to make strategic acquisitions and any balance will be used for general corporate purposes.

 

In considering the recommendation of the Board of Directors that you vote to approve the Proposals, you should be aware that aside from their interests as Company stockholders, the Company’s directors and executive officers have interests in the Proposed Transaction that may be different from, or in addition to, those of other Company stockholders generally. The members of the special committee and the Board of Directors were aware of and considered these interests, among other matters, in evaluating and negotiating the Proposed Transaction, and in recommending to the Company’s stockholders that the Proposals be approved. See the section entitled “The Proposed Transaction—Background of the Proposed Transaction” beginning on page 17. The Company’s stockholders should take these interests into account in deciding whether to vote “FOR” the approval and adoption of the Proposals.

 

As described in more detail below, the interests of the Company’s directors and executive officers in the Proposed Transaction that are different from, or in addition to, those of other Company stockholders may include:

 

 

 

 

In addition, James Martell, who is currently the Chairman of the Board of Directors, will continue as a director following the closing and will participate with JPE as an Investor in the Proposed Transaction. Mr. Martell recused himself from the activities of the Board of Directors relating to the Proposed Transaction after being advised that JPE was interested in having Mr. Martell remain on the Board post-closing and that, if Mr. Martell desired, JPE would extend to Mr. Martell an opportunity to invest in the Proposed Transaction along with JPE.

 

These interests are described in more detail below, and certain of them are quantified in the tables that follow the narrative below.

 

Company Stock Options

 

The Investment Agreement does not provide for special treatment of outstanding options to purchase shares of our common stock, and outstanding options do not automatically vest under the terms of our stock option plan as a result of the Proposed Transaction. As discussed in more detail under “—Employment Agreements with Executive Officers” on page 36 and “—Arrangements with our Directors” on page 38, pursuant to their amended employment agreements, unvested options granted prior to June 13, 2011 and held by our executive officers and Daniel Para, a director of the Company and Chief Executive Officer of Concert Group Logistics, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, will vest and become immediately exercisable upon consummation of the Equity Investment. In consideration for accelerating the vesting of unvested options and the grant of new options, each executive officer and Mr. Para agreed to significantly expand the scope of his restrictive covenants with respect to duration, definition of competitive activities and geographic restrictions and agreed that a certain number of the shares of Company common stock issued upon exercise of such options will be subject to a lock-up. Except for the options held by Mr. Martell, each unvested option held by our non-employee directors will vest and become immediately exercisable upon consummation of the Equity Investment, at which time such directors’ services on the Board of Directors will cease.

 

Employment Agreements with Executive Officers

 

We have previously entered into employment agreements with each of Messrs. Michael Welch, as Chief Executive Officer, and John Welch, as Chief Financial Officer. In connection with the Proposed Transaction, we have entered into amendments to these employment agreements, dated July 18, 2011. The amended employment agreements are effective immediately upon execution but will be null and void and of no further force or effect if the Equity Investment is not consummated. Pursuant to the amended employment agreements, the term of each of Messrs. Michael Welch’s and John Welch’s employment agreement was extended until the third anniversary of the consummation of the Equity Investment.

 

Pursuant to the amended employment agreements, unvested options granted prior to June 13, 2011 and held by our executive officers as of the closing will vest and become immediately exercisable upon consummation of the Equity Investment. In addition, a certain number of shares of Company common stock that are issued to Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch upon exercise of any options that were granted to them prior to June 13, 2011 will be subject to a lock-up until the third anniversary and first anniversary, respectively, of the consummation of the Equity Investment. In the case of Mr. Michael Welch, the lock-up is with respect to 60,000 shares of Company common stock, and in the case of Mr. John Welch, the lock-up is with respect to 5,000 shares of Company common stock.

 

Under the amended agreements with each of Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch, if the executive officer’s employment is terminated without cause (as defined in the employment agreements), or if the executive officer resigns for good reason (as defined in the employment agreements) within one year

following a change in control (as defined in the employment agreements), such as the Proposed Transaction, then the executive officer will receive:

 

 

 

Under their respective amended employment agreements with the Company, Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch are subject to certain restrictive covenants regarding competition, solicitation, interference, confidentiality and disparagement. Prior to amending their employment agreements, Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch were subject to competition and solicitation covenants during their employment and for the one-year period following termination of their employment, and a confidentiality covenant that applied during employment and at all times thereafter. In consideration for extending the term of his employment agreement, accelerating the vesting of unvested options and the grant of stock options (described below) and, in the case of Mr. John Welch, increasing his annual base salary from $160,000 to $180,000, each named executive officer agreed to significantly expand the scope of his restrictive covenants with respect to duration, definition of competitive activities and geographic restrictions. The non-competition, customer non-solicitation and non-interference covenants apply during their employment and for the three-year period following the termination of their employment, the employee non-solicitation covenant applies during their employment and for the five-year period following the termination of their employment and the confidentiality and non-disparagement covenants apply during their employment and at all times thereafter.

 

Pursuant to the amended employment agreements, each of Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch received a grant of options to purchase shares of Company common stock on July 22, 2011, with an exercise price per share of $4.23, the closing price per share of Company common stock on such date. Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch received 200,000 and 175,000 options to purchase shares of Company common stock, respectively. The options will vest, subject to the executive officer’s continued employment with the Company, in three equal annual installments on each anniversary of the consummation of the Equity Investment. For the avoidance of doubt, none of the options that were granted to Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch on July 22, 2011 will accelerate vesting upon consummation of the Proposed Transaction, and the Proposed Transaction will not constitute a change in control of the Company for purposes of such options. Under the amended employment agreements, Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch are each subject to an option clawback provision. In the event of a breach of the restrictive covenants contained in their amended employment agreements with the Company, the termination of the executive officer’s employment by the Company for cause or any financial restatements or material loss to the Company to which the executive officer has materially contributed due to the executive’s fraud or willful misconduct, any unexercised options (whether vested or unvested) that were granted on or after June 13, 2011 and that the executive holds at the time of such breach, termination or misconduct, as applicable, will be immediately forfeited.

 

The following definitions apply to the amended employment agreements with each of Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch.

 

“Cause”, for purposes of the amended employment agreements, generally means (i) the executive officer’s material violation of any of the provisions of their employment agreement, or the rules, policies, and/or procedures of the Company, or commission of any material act of fraud, misappropriation, breach of fiduciary duty or theft against or from the Company, (ii) the executive officer’s violation of any law, rule or regulation of a governmental authority or regulatory body with jurisdiction over the Company or the executive officer relative to the conduct of the executive officer in connection with the Company’s business or its securities or (iii) the conviction of the executive officer of a felony under the laws of the United States of America or any state therein. In the event the executive officer engages in conduct described in clauses (i) or (ii) of the definition of cause, the executive officer will have an opportunity to cure such conduct within

30 days after the Company provides written notice to the executive officer. If the executive officer fails to cure such conduct within the 30-day period or, if the executive officer commits the same violation within 12 months of receiving notice from the Company, then the Company may terminate the executive officer’s employment for cause.

 

“Good reason”, for purposes of the amended employment agreements, will exist if, without the executive officer’s express written consent (i) the Company assigns to the executive officer duties of a non-executive nature or for which the executive officer is not reasonably equipped by his skills and experience, (ii) the Company reduces the salary of the executive officer, or materially reduces the amount of paid vacations to which he is entitled, or his fringe benefits and perquisites, (iii) the Company requires the executive officer to relocate his principal business office or his principal place of residence greater than 50 miles outside of St. Joseph, Michigan, or assigns to the executive officer duties that would reasonably require such relocation, (iv) the Company requires the executive officer, or assigns duties to the executive officer that would reasonably require him, to spend more than 60 normal working days away from the St. Joseph, Michigan area during any consecutive 12-month period, (v) the Company fails to provide office facilities, secretarial services and other administrative services to the executive officer, which are substantially equivalent to the facilities and services provided to executive officer on the date the executive officer entered into the employment agreement or (vi) the Company terminates incentive plans and benefit plans or arrangements, or reduces or limits the executive officer’s participation therein relative to the level of participation of other executives of similar rank, to such an extent as to materially reduce the aggregate value of the executive officer’s incentive compensation and benefits below their aggregate value as of the date the executive officer entered into the employment agreement. In the case of Mr. John Welch, pursuant to his amended employment agreement, “good reason” will also exist if the Company replaces him as Chief Financial Officer. Notwithstanding the existence of an event constituting good reason, a termination shall not be considered to be for good reason unless the executive officer notifies the Company of the existence of the condition constituting good reason within 45 days following the initial existence thereof, the Company fails to remedy the condition within 30 days following receipt of such notice, and the executive officer terminates employment within the earlier of 90 days following the initial existence of such condition and 15 days following notice from the Company that it will not remedy such condition.

 

Arrangements with our Directors

 

Amended Employment Agreement with Mr. Para

 

We have previously entered into an employment agreement with Mr. Para, a director of the Company, in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of Concert Group Logistics, Inc. In connection with the Proposed Transaction, we have entered into an amendment to Mr. Para’s employment agreement, dated July 18, 2011, which extends the term of his employment agreement to the third anniversary of the consummation of the Equity Investment. The amended employment agreement is effective immediately upon execution but will be null and void and of no further force or effect if the Equity Investment is not consummated.

 

Pursuant to his amended employment agreement, unvested options granted prior to June 13, 2011 and held by Mr. Para as of the closing will vest and become immediately exercisable upon consummation of the Equity Investment. In addition, 60,000 shares of Company common stock that are issued to Mr. Para upon exercise of any options that were granted to him prior to June 13, 2011 will be subject to a lock-up until the third anniversary of the consummation of the Equity Investment.

 

Under the amended employment agreement with Mr. Para, if his employment is terminated without cause (as defined in his employment agreement), or if Mr. Para resigns for good reason (as defined in his employment agreement) within one year following a change in control (as defined in his employment agreement), such as the Proposed Transaction, then Mr. Para will receive:

 

 

 

Under his amended employment agreement, if Mr. Para’s employment is terminated without cause at any time other than within one year following a change in control, such as the Proposed Transaction, then Mr. Para will receive any bonus that the Company has determined in writing has been earned as of the date of termination plus base salary for the 18-month period following termination (which, pursuant to his amended employment agreement, was increased from the one-year period following termination), payable in accordance with the Company’s normal payroll practices.

 

Under his amended employment agreement, Mr. Para is subject to the same restrictive covenants and option clawback provisions to which Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch are subject. Prior to amending his employment agreement, Mr. Para was subject to competition and solicitation covenants during his employment and for the one-year period following termination of his employment, and a confidentiality covenant that applied during employment and at all times thereafter. In consideration for extending the term of his employment agreement, increasing his annual base salary from $180,000 to $240,000, increasing his severance payments, accelerating the vesting of his unvested options and the grant of stock options (described below), Mr. Para agreed to significantly expand the scope of his restrictive covenants with respect to duration, definition of competitive activities and geographic restrictions.

 

In addition, pursuant to his amended employment agreement, Mr. Para received a grant of 200,000 options to purchase shares of Company common stock on July 22, 2011, with an exercise price per share of $4.23, the closing price per share of Company common stock on such date. The options will vest on terms substantially similar to the options that were granted to Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch on July 22, 2011. For the avoidance of doubt, none of the options that were granted to Mr. Para on July 22, 2011 will accelerate vesting upon consummation of the Proposed Transaction, and the Proposed Transaction will not constitute a change in control of the Company for purposes of such options.

 

In addition, the definitions contained in Mr. Para’s amended employment agreement are identical to the definitions contained in the amended employment agreement with Mr. Michael Welch, except that (a) clause (i) of the definition of good reason applies only if the Company assigns to Mr. Para a position or duties that the Company does not consider to be at the managerial level and (b) clauses (iii) and (iv) of the definition of good reason apply with respect to the greater Chicago metropolitan area instead of St. Joseph, Michigan. As with the employment agreements with Messrs. Michael Welch and John Welch, the Proposed Transaction will be a change of control under Mr. Para’s employment agreement.

 

Arrangements with Other Directors

 

Under the terms of the option award agreement for options granted to directors pursuant to the Company’s Amended and Restated 2001 Stock Option Plan, if, within one year following a change in control of the Company (which includes the Proposed Transaction), the director’s service as a member of the Board of Directors ceases for any reason, then any unvested options held by such director will immediately vest and become exercisable upon the cessation of service. Pursuant to the Investment Agreement, with the exception of Mr. James Martell, the service of the Company’s current directors will terminate upon the consummation of the Proposed Transaction and their outstanding options will vest and become exercisable at such time.

 

Mr. Martell, who is currently Chairman of the Board of Directors, and who will continue as a director following the consummation of the Proposed Transaction, will be an Investor in the Proposed Transaction. The details of Mr. Martell’s investment are as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

Quantification of Payments and Benefits

 

The following table shows the amounts of payments and benefits that each director and executive officer of the Company would receive in connection with the Proposed Transaction, assuming the consummation of the Proposed Transaction occurred on August 1, 2011, the latest practicable date prior to the mailing of this proxy statement, and, as applicable, the service of the director ceased and the employment of the executive officer was terminated by the Company without cause or by the executive officer for good reason, in each case, on such date.

 

Executive Officers and Directors

 

 

 

 

 

 

Payment in Respect of Vested Options

 

 

 

 

Under the Investment Agreement, the Company and the Investors have agreed to use their reasonable best efforts to obtain all required governmental approvals in connection with the completion of the Proposed Transaction.

 

The Company and JPE have determined that no filing under the HSR Act is required in connection with the Equity Investment.

 

We are unaware of any material federal, state or foreign regulatory requirements or approvals required for completion of the Equity Investment.

 

The presence of a significant stockholder may affect the ability of a third party to acquire the Company. As of the record date, there were 33,011,561 shares of Company common stock outstanding, plus outstanding options to purchase an additional 3,267,750 shares of Company common stock. Based upon the number of shares of Company common stock outstanding on the record date, and excluding any shares issuable upon the exercise of currently outstanding options, JPE would have held in the aggregate approximately 50.8% of the total voting power of the Company’s capital stock before giving effect to the exercise of any Warrants, and approximately 65.0% of the total voting power of the Company’s capital stock after giving effect to the exercise of all of the Warrants. Because the Preferred Stock votes on an “as converted” basis, the conversion of the Preferred Stock into Company common stock will not reduce the general voting power of the Investors allocable to the Preferred Stock upon its issuance. The Reverse Stock Split will not affect the relative percentage of the voting power held by JPE or any other stockholder (except as a result of any cash paid in lieu of fractional shares in connection with the Reverse Stock Split).

 

In addition, it is expected that the Company will use the proceeds of the Equity Investment principally to make acquisitions, and JPE intends following the closing to raise additional capital to consummate acquisitions. The additional capital may include debt financing, which would increase the Company’s leverage risk and debt service expense, or additional equity financing, which would further dilute the ownership of the Company’s existing stockholders.

 

For U.S. Federal income tax purposes, no income, gain or loss will be recognized by the Company’s stockholders in connection with the Proposed Transaction.

 

The Company is incorporated in the State of Delaware and, accordingly, subject to the Delaware General Corporation Law, or the “DGCL”. The Company’s stockholders are not entitled to appraisal rights under the DGCL with respect to the Proposed Transaction.

 

On June 13, 2011, the Company entered into the Investment Agreement with the Investors. The summary of the material terms of the Investment Agreement below and elsewhere in this proxy statement is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Investment Agreement, a copy of which is attached to this proxy statement as Annex A and which we incorporate by reference into this document. This summary may not contain all of the information about the Investment Agreement that is important to you. We encourage you to read carefully the Investment Agreement in its entirety.

 

Subject to the terms and conditions of the Investment Agreement, upon the closing, the Company will issue to the Investors, for $75,000,000 in cash, (i) an aggregate of 75,000 shares of Preferred Stock and (ii) Warrants to purchase 42,857,143 shares of common stock of the Company (subject to adjustment in connection with the contemplated Reverse Stock Split).

 

In the Investment Agreement, JPE is empowered to act on behalf of the other Investors in connection with the transactions contemplated thereunder. This appointment entitles JPE to, among other things:

 

 

Unless the Company and JPE agree otherwise, the Equity Investment will close on a date to be specified by the Company and JPE not later than two days after the satisfaction or waiver of all the conditions in the Investment Agreement. The parties expect to close the Equity Investment in the third quarter of 2011.

 

In the event that any Investor (other than JPE) breaches its obligation to pay to the Company at the closing its portion of the purchase price for the Securities in accordance with the Investment Agreement, JPE is obligated to purchase such Securities from the Company. In that event, JPE has the right, in its sole discretion, to delay the closing for a period of up to five business days.

 

The representations and warranties of the Company contained in the Investment Agreement have been made solely for the benefit of the Investors. In addition, such representations and warranties (a) have been made only for purposes of the Investment Agreement, (b) have been qualified by confidential disclosures made to the Investors in connection with the Investment Agreement, (c) are subject to materiality qualifications contained in the Investment Agreement which may differ from what may be viewed as material by investors generally, (d) were made only as of the date of the Investment Agreement or such other date as is specified in the Investment Agreement and (e) have been included in the Investment Agreement for the purpose of allocating risk between the contracting parties rather than establishing matters as facts. Accordingly, the summary of the representations and warranties set forth below and the Investment Agreement annexed hereto are included in this filing only to provide stockholders with information regarding the terms of the Investment Agreement and not to provide investors with any other factual information regarding the Company or its business. The Company’s stockholders should not rely on the representations and warranties or any descriptions thereof as characterizations of the actual state of facts or condition of the Company or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates. Moreover, information concerning the subject matter of the representations and

warranties may change after the date of the Investment Agreement, which subsequent information may or may not be fully reflected in the Company’s public disclosures.

 

Our representations and warranties relate to, among other things:

 

 

 

For purposes of the Investment Agreement, “material adverse effect” means any state of facts, change, development, event, effect, condition, occurrence, action or omission that, alone or together with any other state of facts, change, development, event, effect, condition, occurrence, action or omission, (i) materially adversely affects the business, assets, properties, financial condition or results of operations of the Company and its subsidiaries, taken as a whole, or (ii) prevents, materially impedes or materially delays the consummation by the Company of the Equity Investment or the other transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement.

 

However, none of the following will be deemed either alone or in combination to constitute, and none of the following will be taken into account in determining whether there has been or would be, a “material adverse effect” on the Company:

 

 

In the Investment Agreement, the Investors make various customary representations and warranties. Their representations and warranties relate to, among other things:

 

 

Under the Investment Agreement, we have agreed that, subject to certain exceptions set forth in the Investment Agreement, between June 13, 2011 and the closing we and our subsidiaries will:

 

 

We have also agreed that during the same period, subject to certain exceptions set forth in the Investment Agreement, neither we nor our subsidiaries will:

 

 

 

We have agreed to, as promptly as reasonably practicable after the date of the Investment Agreement, establish a record date for, duly call, give notice of, convene and hold a meeting of our stockholders, and have agreed to cause such meeting to occur by the 45th calendar day following the mailing of this proxy statement, for the purpose of obtaining stockholder approval of the Proposals, regardless of whether our Board of Directors has determined at any time that the Investment Agreement is no longer advisable or recommends that the stockholders of the Company vote against the Proposals (subject to our right to terminate the Investment Agreement in certain circumstances), subject to certain exceptions specified in the Investment Agreement. As of the date of this proxy statement, we have established a record date of August 1, 2011 and duly called such a meeting to be convened and held on September 1, 2011.

In addition, we have agreed, subject to the exceptions set forth in the following section, that our Board of Directors will recommend to our stockholders that they vote in favor of the Proposals and include such recommendation in this proxy statement, and to use our reasonable best efforts to solicit stockholder approval of the Proposals.

 

We have agreed that neither we nor any of our subsidiaries, directors, officers, employees, investment bankers or other representatives will, directly or indirectly:

 

 

However, prior to the receipt of stockholder approval of Proposals 1 through 5, if we receive an unsolicited bona fide written takeover proposal from a third party that our Board of Directors (acting upon the affirmative recommendation of the special committee), after consultation with our financial advisor and outside legal counsel, determines in good faith constitutes or could reasonably be expected to lead to a superior proposal, we may, and we may permit our subsidiaries and representatives to, furnish information with respect to the Company and our subsidiaries to the person making such takeover proposal pursuant to a nondisclosure agreement which contains terms that are no less restrictive than those contained in the nondisclosure agreement with JPE (provided that all such information has been or is provided to JPE), and participate in discussions or negotiations with the person making such takeover proposal.

 

For purposes of the Investment Agreement, “takeover proposal” means any inquiry, proposal or offer from any person or group relating to, or that could reasonably be expected to lead to, any merger, consolidation, business combination, recapitalization, merger, consolidation, liquidation or dissolution involving the Company, or the direct or indirect acquisition (including by way of any tender offer, exchange offer, liquidation, joint venture or other similar transaction), of:

 

 

For purposes of the Investment Agreement, “superior proposal” means any binding bona fide written offer which did not result from a breach of the above restrictions, and which:

 

 

We have agreed that neither the Board of Directors nor any committee thereof will (or will agree or resolve to):

 

 

We refer to any action described in the foregoing bullets as an “adverse recommendation change”.

 

In addition, we have agreed that neither the Board of Directors nor any committee thereof will (or will agree or resolve to) cause or permit the Company to enter into any letter of intent, memorandum of understanding, acquisition agreement, merger agreement or other agreement (each of which we refer to as an “acquisition agreement”) constituting or related to, or which is intended to or is reasonably likely to lead to, any takeover proposal (other than a permitted nondisclosure agreement).

 

Notwithstanding the foregoing two paragraphs, at any time prior to stockholder approval of Proposals 1 through 5, the Board of Directors may:

 

 

in each case, if the Board of Directors determines in good faith, after consultation with its outside legal counsel and its financial advisor, that the failure to do so would be inconsistent with its fiduciary duties to the stockholders of the Company under applicable law. However, the Board of Directors and the committees thereof may not, and will cause the Company not to, take any of the actions described in the foregoing two bullets unless:

 

 

During the three business day period described above, the Company is obligated to negotiate in good faith with JPE regarding any revisions to the terms of the Investment Agreement proposed by JPE.

 

For purposes of the Investment Agreement, the term “superior acquisition proposal” means a superior proposal that, if consummated, would result in the offering person (or, in the case of a direct merger between such person and the Company, the stockholders of such person) acquiring, directly or indirectly, all or substantially all of the voting power of the capital stock of the Company or all or substantially all of the assets of the Company and its subsidiaries, taken as a whole.

 

For purposes of the Investment Agreement, the term “intervening event” means an event or other information (other than any related to a takeover proposal), unknown to the Board of Directors as of the date

of the Investment Agreement, which becomes known prior to stockholder approval of Proposals 1 through 5 and which causes the Board of Directors to determine in good faith, after consultation with its outside legal counsel and its financial advisor, that its failure to effect an adverse recommendation change would be inconsistent with its fiduciary duties to the stockholders of the Company under applicable law.

 

In addition, we have agreed to, as promptly as possible and in any event within 24 hours after the receipt thereof, advise JPE of any takeover proposal and the terms and conditions of, and other facts regarding, such takeover proposal, and to keep JPE informed on a reasonably current basis of the status and other developments with respect to such takeover proposal and promptly provide JPE with copies of all documentation relating to such takeover proposal.

 

We have agreed to engage (and have as of the date of this proxy statement engaged) an independent registered public accounting firm of national reputation designated by JPE for the purpose of re-auditing the historical consolidated financial statements of the Company for fiscal years 2009 and 2010. In the event that the closing does not occur (other than as a result of the termination of the Investment Agreement by the Company in connection with a “superior acquisition proposal”, or by JPE as a result of a breach by the Company or an “adverse recommendation change”) and the engagement of the new auditor is terminated in connection with the termination of the Investment Agreement, JPE is obligated to reimburse the Company for the fees and expenses of the accounting firm.

 

Subject to the terms and conditions of the Investment Agreement, each party has agreed to use its reasonable best efforts to take all actions necessary, proper or advisable to consummate and to make effective the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement. Among other things, each party has committed to use such efforts to cooperate with each other to obtain all necessary consents, approvals and authorizations from governmental authorities and third parties.

 

The Company and JPE have determined that no filing under the HSR Act, or any similar antitrust approval, is required in connection with the Equity Investment.

 

Upon the closing of the Equity Investment, the Board will be reconstituted such that: (1) there will be eight Board members, (2) one of such directors will be James Martell (or a replacement acceptable to JPE), (3) seven of such directors will be designated by JPE (including Bradley Jacobs), (4) each standing committee of the Board will be reconstituted in a manner reasonably acceptable to JPE and (5) Bradley Jacobs will become the Chairman of the Board.

 

In connection with each meeting of stockholders of the Company at which directors are to be elected to serve on the Board of Directors, the Company has agreed to take all necessary steps to nominate the candidates appointed by JPE and to use its reasonable best efforts to cause the Board of Directors to unanimously recommend that the stockholders of the Company vote in favor of each such person for election to the Board of Directors. If, for any reason, a candidate appointed by JPE is determined to be unqualified to serve on the Board of Directors because such appointment would constitute a breach of the fiduciary duties of the Board of Directors or applicable law or stock exchange requirements, JPE will have the right to designate an alternative person. Each person so appointed will hold office as a director of the Company for such term as is provided in the Company’s constituent documents or until his or her death, resignation or removal from the Board of Directors or until his or her successor has been duly elected and qualified. If any such appointee ceases to serve as a director of the Company for any reason during his or her term, the Company will use its reasonable best efforts to cause the Board of Directors to fill the vacancy with a replacement designated by JPE.

Subject to applicable law and stock exchange requirements, JPE will have the right to designate:

 

 

None of the foregoing will prevent the Board of Directors from acting in accordance with its fiduciary duties or applicable law or stock exchange requirements or from acting in good faith in accordance with the Company’s constituent documents, while giving due consideration to the intent of the Investment Agreement.

 

The board representation rights of JPE under the Investment Agreement are in addition to, and not in limitation of, JPE’s voting rights as a holder of capital stock of the Company.

 

Mr. James Martell, who is currently Chairman of the Board of the Company, and who will continue as a director on the reconstituted Board of Directors as described above and will be an Investor in the Equity Investment, recused himself from Board of Directors approval of the Investment Agreement and related recommendations.

 

The respective obligations of the Investors and the Company to complete the Equity Investment are subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the following conditions:

 

 

 

The obligations of the Investors to complete the Equity Investment are further subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the following conditions:

 

 

 

The obligation of the Company to complete the Equity Investment is further subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the following conditions:

 

 

In the event of any breach by any Investor (other than JPE) that would result in the failure of a closing condition, JPE will be entitled, in its sole discretion, to purchase the shares of Preferred Stock and Warrants otherwise allocable to the breaching Investor on the terms set forth in the Investment Agreement and, in such event, the breach by such Investor that would otherwise result in the failure of a closing condition will be deemed cured for purposes of the closing.

 

The Company and JPE may agree in writing to terminate the Investment Agreement at any time prior to completing the Equity Investment, even after the stockholders of the Company have voted on the Proposals. The Investment Agreement may also be terminated in certain other circumstances, including:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A termination fee equal to $2,774,000 (determined in accordance with the Investment Agreement) is payable by the Company to JPE if the Investment Agreement is terminated:

 

 

A termination fee of $2,249,000 is payable by the Company to JPE if the Investment Agreement is terminated:

 

 

 

 

In addition, whether or not the closing occurs, the Company is obligated to reimburse JPE for up to $1,000,000 of the expenses incurred by JPE in connection with the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement. However, such expenses are not reimbursable by the Company if the Investment Agreement is terminated:

 

 

 

 

The reimbursement of JPE’s expenses as provided above does not relieve the Company of any obligation to pay any applicable termination fee.

 

The following is a summary of the material terms of the Preferred Stock as contained in the Certificate of Designation of Series A Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock, which will be filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware (the “Certificate of Designation”). The Certificate of Designation is set forth in Exhibit A to the Investment Agreement, which is filed herewith as Annex A to this proxy statement and is incorporated by reference herein. Stockholders are urged to carefully read the Certificate of Designation in its entirety.

 

Authorized Shares and Liquidation Preference

 

We will designate 75,000 authorized preferred shares as “Series A Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock”, with a par value of $0.001 per share and an initial liquidation preference of $1,000 per share, for an aggregate initial liquidation preference of $75,000,000.

 

Ranking

 

The Preferred Stock will rank, with respect to dividend rights and rights on liquidation, winding-up or dissolution, senior to Company common stock and each other class or series of capital stock outstanding or established after the date of issuance of the Preferred Stock the terms of which do not expressly provide that it ranks on a parity with or senior to the Preferred Stock as to dividend rights and rights on liquidation, winding-up and dissolution. The Preferred Stock will rank on a parity with or junior to each class or series of capital stock the terms of which expressly provide for a pari passu or senior ranking relative to the Preferred Stock, respectively.

 

Dividends

 

Dividends on the Preferred Stock will be payable quarterly, when, as and if declared by the Board of Directors or a duly authorized committee, out of the assets of the Company legally available for the payment of dividends, on the 15th calendar day (or the following business day if the 15th is not a business day) of January, April, July and October of each year at the rate per annum of 4% per share on the then-applicable liquidation preference (subject to the following paragraph). The amount of dividends payable for any other period that is shorter or longer than a full quarterly dividend period will be computed on the basis of a 360-day year consisting of twelve 30-day months.

 

In the event that dividends are paid on shares of Company common stock in any dividend period with respect to the Preferred Stock, then the dividend payable in respect of each share of Preferred Stock for such period will be equal to the greater of (1) the amount otherwise payable in respect of such share of Preferred Stock in accordance with the foregoing paragraph and (2) the product of (A) the aggregate dividends payable per share of Company common stock in such dividend period times (B) the number of shares of Company common stock into which such share of Preferred Stock is then convertible.

 

A dividend period with respect to a dividend payment date is the period commencing on the preceding dividend payment date or, if none, the date of original issuance, and ending on the day immediately prior to the next dividend payment date.

 

The Company will make each dividend payment on the Preferred Stock in cash.

 

Accretion

 

If the Company is unable to, or otherwise fails to, pay dividends in full on the Preferred Stock on any dividend payment date, the then-applicable liquidation preference will be increased as of the first day of the immediately succeeding dividend period by the amount of the unpaid dividends. The amount of dividends payable for any dividend period following a non-payment of dividends will be calculated on the basis of the liquidation preference, including such accreted dividends, determined as of the first day of the relevant dividend period. The Company may pay all or a portion of any dividends so accreted on any regular dividend payment date or any other date fixed by the Board of Directors or a duly authorized committee.

Payment Restrictions

 

No dividends may be declared or paid on any capital stock of the Company ranking on a parity with or junior to the Preferred Stock (including the Company common stock), and no such capital stock may be redeemed or repurchased by or on behalf of the Company, unless all accrued and unpaid dividends have been paid on the Preferred Stock and any capital stock of the Company ranking on a parity with the Preferred Stock. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if full dividends have not been paid on the Preferred Stock and any parity stock, dividends may be declared and paid on the Preferred Stock and such parity stock so long as the dividends are declared and paid pro rata.

 

Liquidation

 

In the event we voluntarily or involuntarily liquidate, dissolve or wind up, the holders of the Preferred Stock will be entitled, before any distribution to the holders of our common stock or any other junior capital stock, and subject to the rights of our creditors, to receive an amount equal to the greater of (i) the aggregate accreted liquidation preference plus an amount equal to any accrued and unpaid dividends (whether or not declared) for the then-current dividend period and (ii) the payment or distribution to which such holders would have been entitled if the Preferred Stock were converted into Company common stock immediately before such liquidation, dissolution or winding-up.

 

Voting Rights

 

The Preferred Stock will vote together with the Company common stock on an “as-converted” basis on all matters, except as otherwise required by law. In addition, the approval of the holders of at least a majority of outstanding shares of the Preferred Stock, voting separately as a single class, will be required (1) for any amendment of the Company Certificate if the amendment would alter the powers, preferences, privileges or rights of the holders of Preferred Stock so as to affect them adversely, (2) to issue, authorize or increase the authorized amount of, or issue or authorize any obligation or security convertible into or evidencing a right to purchase, any capital stock of the Company ranking on a parity with or senior to the Preferred Stock, or (3) to reclassify any authorized capital stock of the Company into any parity stock or senior stock, or any obligation or security convertible into or evidencing a right to purchase any parity stock or senior stock.

 

Conversion

 

The Preferred Stock will be convertible at any time, in whole or in part and from time to time, at the option of the holder thereof into a number of shares of Company common stock equal to the then-applicable liquidation preference divided by the then-applicable conversion price, which shall initially be $1.75 per share of Company common stock, for an effective initial aggregate conversion rate of 42,857,143 shares of Company common stock (before giving effect to the Reverse Stock Split).

 

After giving effect to the Reverse Stock Split, the Preferred Stock will have a conversion price of $7.00 per share of Company common stock.

 

The Preferred Stock will have the benefit of customary anti-dilution adjustments.

 

Transfer of Securities

 

The Preferred Stock and the shares of Company common stock issuable upon conversion thereof will initially not be registered under the Securities Act and may not be offered or sold except in compliance with the registration requirements of the Securities Act and any other applicable securities laws. The above mentioned securities will have the benefit of certain registration rights under the Securities Act pursuant to a Registration Rights Agreement to be entered into by the Company as described below.

 

Redemption

 

The Preferred Stock is not redeemable or subject to any required offer to purchase.

 

The summary of the material terms of the Warrants below and elsewhere in this proxy statement is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Warrant Certificate, a copy of which is set forth as Exhibit B to the Investment Agreement, which is filed herewith as Annex A to this proxy statement and incorporated by reference into this document. This summary may not contain all of the information about the Warrants that is important to you. We encourage you to read carefully the Warrant Certificate in its entirety.

 

The Warrants will initially grant the holders the right to purchase an aggregate of 42,857,143 shares of Company common stock at an exercise price of $1.75 per share of Company common stock, in each case subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments and before giving effect to the Reverse Stock Split. The Warrants will be exercisable at the option of the holder at any time from the closing date until the tenth anniversary of the closing date.

 

After giving effect to the Reverse Stock Split, the Warrants will have an exercise price of $7.00 per share of Company common stock, and the aggregate number of shares of Company common stock subject to the Warrants will be 10,714,286 shares.

 

Transfer of Securities

 

The Warrants and the shares of Company common stock issuable upon exercise thereof will initially not be registered under the Securities Act and may not be offered or sold except in compliance with the registration requirements of the Securities Act and any other applicable securities laws. The above mentioned securities will have the benefit of certain registration rights under the Securities Act pursuant to a Registration Rights Agreement to be entered into by the Company as described below.

 

Voting Rights and Dividends

 

Holders of the Warrants (in their capacity as such) will not be entitled to any rights of a stockholder of the Company, including the right to vote or to consent with respect to any matter, or to receive dividends, prior to exercising their Warrants.

 

Pursuant to the Investment Agreement, the Company has agreed to enter into a Registration Rights Agreement concurrently with the closing. The summary of the material terms of the Registration Rights Agreement below and elsewhere in this proxy statement is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Summary of Principal Registration Rights Provisions, a copy of which is set forth in Exhibit C to the Investment Agreement, which is filed herewith as Annex A to this proxy statement and incorporated by reference into this document. This summary may not contain all of the information about the Summary of Principal Registration Rights Provisions that is important to you. We encourage you to read carefully the Summary of Principal Registration Rights Provisions in its entirety. In addition, the complete terms of the Registration Rights Agreement are not yet final.

 

The Registration Rights Agreement will provide the holders of the Securities with certain rights to cause the Company to register the sale of shares of Preferred Stock, Warrants and shares of Company common stock issued or issuable upon conversion of the Preferred Stock or upon exercise of the Warrants, in each case other than any such securities that are then freely transferable without registration pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act without limitation as to volume, manner of sale or other restrictions under Rule 144. We refer to the securities that are subject to registration under the Registration Rights Agreement as provided above as “Registrable Securities”.

 

Demand Registrations

 

At any time on or after the closing of the Equity Investment, holders of Registrable Securities representing no less than a majority of the Company common stock constituting Registrable Securities or issuable upon conversion of Preferred Stock or exercise of Warrants constituting Registrable Securities may request registration of the sale of such securities by giving the Company written notice thereof. The Company must then use reasonable best efforts to (1) file a registration statement registering such Registrable Securities as promptly as reasonably practicable and in any event within 30 days (if on Form S-3) or 45 days (if on Form S-1) and (2) have such registration statement declared effective as promptly as reasonably practicable thereafter (subject to customary exceptions to be agreed). Such majority holders may request a total of three demand registrations.

 

Piggyback Registrations

 

If the Company registers its securities on a registration statement that permits the inclusion of the Registrable Securities, the Company must give JPE prompt written notice thereof (subject to certain exceptions to be agreed). The Company must then include on such registration statement all Registrable Securities requested to be included therein (subject to certain exceptions to be agreed).

 

Expenses of Registration and Selling

 

Subject to certain exceptions, all expenses incurred in connection with the registration or sale of the Registrable Securities will be borne by the Company.

 

Concurrently with the execution of the Investment Agreement, certain stockholders of the Company entered into Voting Agreements with JPE. The summary of the material terms of the Voting Agreements below and elsewhere in this proxy statement is qualified in its entirety by reference to the two Voting Agreements, copies of which are filed herewith as Annex C and Annex D to this proxy statement and which we incorporate by reference into this document. This summary may not contain all of the information about the Voting Agreements that is important to you. We encourage you to read carefully the Voting Agreements in their entirety.

 

Pursuant to the Voting Agreements, each of Michael Welch, Chief Executive Officer and a director of the Company, and Daniel Para, an officer and director of the Company (the “Stockholders”), have agreed in their capacities as stockholders of the Company to vote their shares of Company common stock in favor of the Equity Investment and related approvals, and have granted JPE a proxy in respect of their shares of Company common stock in connection therewith.

 

Voting

 

The Stockholders unconditionally agree to vote all of their respective shares of Company common stock to approve the Proposals. They further agree to vote their shares against and not consent to the approval of any (1) takeover proposal, (2) reorganization, recapitalization, liquidation or winding-up of the Company or (3) other extraordinary transaction involving the Company or corporate action the consummation of which would prevent, impede or delay the consummation of the transactions contemplated by the Investment Agreement.

 

Irrevocable Proxy

 

The Stockholders have granted an irrevocable proxy appointing JPE as their attorney-in-fact and proxy, with full power of substitution, for and in Stockholders’ names, to vote, express consent or dissent, or otherwise to utilize such voting power solely in the manner described above. The proxies so granted will be automatically revoked upon termination of the Voting Agreements in accordance with their terms.

 

Covenants of Stockholders

 

Except as provided above, the Stockholders agree not to enter into any voting trust or other arrangement with respect to the voting of any shares of Company common stock. Nor will they sell, assign or otherwise dispose of or encumber any shares of Company common stock during the term of the agreements. They similarly agree not to seek or solicit any such sale, assignment or disposition of their shares of Company common stock, and must provide prompt notice to JPE if they are approached by any person for that purpose.

 

Subsequent Acquisitions of Shares

 

In the event that either Stockholder acquires ownership of, or the power to vote or direct the voting of, any shares of Company common stock following the date of his respective Voting Agreement, such shares will, without further action of the parties, be subject to the provisions of such Voting Agreement.

 

Termination

 

The Voting Agreements automatically terminate upon the earliest of (1) the termination of the Investment Agreement, (2) the consummation of the Equity Investment and (3) the date of any amendment, modification, change or waiver of the Investment Agreement that results in a change to the terms of the Securities that is material and adverse to the Company and that is not consented to in writing by the Stockholder in his sole discretion prior to such amendment, modification, change or waiver of the Investment Agreement.

 

The Company common stock is traded on the NYSE Amex under the symbol “XPO”. The following table sets forth the high and low daily closing sales prices per share of Company common stock on the NYSE Amex for the periods indicated.

 

Market Information