Alico, Inc.
P.O. Box 338
LaBelle, FL 33975
Commissions file number 0-261
April 16, 2010
United States Securities & Exchange Commission
Mr. John Reynolds
Assistant Director
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20549-7010
Re: Alico, Inc.
Form 10-K, filed 12-14-2009
File No. 000-00261
Dear Mr. Reynolds:
We have carefully reviewed your comment letter dated April 6, 2010. Our
responses are included in this letter and follow the same sequence as your
comments. For your convenience, we have restated the SEC comments below and
follow each comment with our response.
Definitive Schedule 14A,
filed January 20, 2010
Compensation Discussion and
Analysis, page 15
SEC Comment:We note your response
to prior comment number one of our letter dated March 8, 2010. Please explain
your response in light of the following disclosures in your filing:
In the second
paragraph on page 16 you have stated:
Pay must be performance based so that a significant part of each
executives annual cash compensation is directly linked to a combination of the
overall performance of the Company, division and individual financial and
non-financial performance goal(based on the achievement of predetermined
business plan goals and metrics).
In the third paragraph on page 16 you have stated:
The annual performance review for determining compensation follows a
principled, structured framework for analysis. This analysis focuses on
financial and non-financial performance measures that the Committee believes
collectively best indicate successful management of Alico's business. The
analysis takes into account performance against internal business goals.
In the first
paragraph under the heading, Measuring Performance on page 17 you have
stated:
The Committee compares each Executive Officer's contribution to
the Companys overall performance and compares each Executive Officer's
performance against the stated goals in the strategic goals and business plans
created for such Executive Officer. In order to achieve target
compensation awards, the Committee must determine that strategic initiatives and
internal business goals for the performance measures were attained.
Response:
Traditionally, as it has in years past, each
member of the management team is asked to submit to the Compensation Committee
his or her business plan and strategic goals for the coming year. The Committee
then reviews such goals and responds to each member of the management team with
stated written performance goals, typically accepting or modifying the goals
provided by the executive officers themselves. For fiscal 2009, in light of the
Company's performance the previous year and corresponding reduction in cash
bonuses, the Committee reviewed the performance goals established by the
executive officers for 2009 but did not respond in writing to each such member
of the management team with respect to those goals, deciding instead that while
those performance objectives would certainly be taken into consideration, the
overarching goal for the Company would be to make a profit. The annual business
plan developed for the company anticipated a pretax profit level of
approximately $8.1 million. The actual operations of the Company resulted in a
pretax loss of $3.5 million. While the negative operating results were
influenced by events largely beyond the control of the executive officers
(including impairment charges caused by real estate market declines of $5.1
million, freeze losses to its crops totaling approximately $1.4 million, and a
default on a mortgage and lower interest rates causing interest income to
decline by $3.6 million), the Compensation Committee evaluated the overall
financial condition of the Company and determined it financially responsible to
forego annual incentive payments. The Committee decided that if no profit was
achieved for fiscal 2009, no cash incentives would be paid. This in fact is what
transpired: since the Company did not make a profit no bonuses were paid, as
reflected in the Company's proxy statement. Accordingly, the Committee did not
deem it material to disclose the self-imposed senior management performance
targets, although it certainly did review and take them into consideration when
evaluating individual executive performance, setting compensation and discussing
incentive payouts, but the Company's financial performance trumped all other
performance measures.
If the Commission
believes that it would be informative to disclose such management goals and
strategic initiatives despite the Committee?s single imposed benchmark, we will
certainly do so in future filings.
SEC Comment: We note your
response to prior comment number three. Please comply with the remaining part of
the comment, which states:
Further, we note the
Bonus/Cash Incentive Potential disclosed in the table on page 19, which does not
appear as a non-equity incentive grant in this table, and the sentence under
"Measuring Performance" on page 17 which states, in order to achieve target
compensation awards, the Committee must determine that strategic initiatives and
internal business goals for the performance measures were attained. Please
explain the absence of non- equity grants in this table. In future filings
please ensure that this table includes all awards in the last fiscal year,
including any grants of non-equity incentive awards. In your response letter,
please provide draft disclosure responsive to this comment.
Response:
There were no cash bonus/incentive or other non-equity awards granted to
any members of management during fiscal 2009. Accordingly, the various columns
relating to such disclosure were omitted from the table captioned "GRANTS OF
PLAN-BASED AWARDS" in reliance on the general instructions for Regulation S-K,
Item 402, providing under 402(a)(5) that "A table or column may be omitted if
there has been no compensation awarded to, earned by, or paid to any of the
named executive officers or directors required to be reported in that table or
column in any fiscal year covered by that table". To the extent that such
awards are made in the future, we will be sure to include all the required
columns in the table.
The Company acknowledges the following:
the
Company is responsible for the adequacy and accuracy of the disclosure in the
filings;
staff
comments or changes to disclosure in response to staff comments do not foreclose
the Commission from taking any action with respect to the filings; and
the
Company may not assert staff comments as a defense in any proceeding initiated
by the Commission or my person under the federal securities laws of the United
States.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Patrick W. Murphy
Patrick W. Murphy
Senior Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer