Edgar Filing: FreightCar America, Inc.

Form S-1

As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 6, 2005

Registration No. 333-

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM S-1

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER

THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

FreightCar America, Inc.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware

3743

25-1837219

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

(Primary Standard Industrial

Classification Code Number)

(I.R.S. employer identification

number)

Two North Riverside Plaza

Suite 1250

Chicago, Illinois 60606

(800) 458-2235

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)

John E. Carroll, Jr.

President and Chief Executive Officer

FreightCar America, Inc.

Two North Riverside Plaza

Suite 1250

Chicago, Illinois 60606

(800) 458-2235

(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for service)

Copies To:

Robert F. Wall, Esq.

David A. Sakowitz, Esq.

Winston & Strawn LLP

35 W. Wacker Drive

Chicago, Illinois 60601-9703

(312) 558-5600

Stephen T. Giove, Esq.

Lisa L. Jacobs, Esq.

Shearman & Sterling LLP

599 Lexington Avenue

New York, New York 10022-6069

(212) 848-4000

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after the effectiveness of this registration statement.

If any of the securities being registered on this form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, please check the following box. ¨

If this form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, please check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨

If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨

If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨

If delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to Rule 434, please check the following box. ¨

CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE

Title of each class of securities to be registered

Amount to

Be registered(a)

Proposed
maximum

offering price per

share(b)

Proposed
maximum

aggregate offering
price(b)

Amount of

registration fee

Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share

2,677,332

$37.425

$100,199,150

$11,794

(a)

Includes 349,217 shares of Common Stock which may be purchased by the underwriters from selling stockholders to cover over-allotments, if any.

(b)

Estimated solely for the purpose of calculating the registration fee in accordance with Rule 457(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, based on the average of the high and low prices of our common stock on August 31, 2005, as reported on the Nasdaq National Market.

The registrant hereby amends this registration statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this registration statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act, or until the registration statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.

The information in this preliminary prospectus is not complete and may be changed. The selling stockholders may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This preliminary prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities, and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities, in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.


PRELIMINARY PROSPECTUS		Subject to Completion		, 2005

2,328,115 Shares

LOGO

FreightCar America, Inc.

Common Stock

The selling stockholders, including all of our executive officers and certain of our directors, are offering 2,328,115 shares of our common stock by this prospectus. We are not selling shares and will not receive any proceeds from the sale of shares by the selling stockholders.

Our common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol “RAIL.” On September 2, 2005, the last sale price of our common stock as reported on the Nasdaq National Market was $37.98 per share.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before buying any shares, you should carefully read the discussion of material risks of investing in our common stock in “ Risk factors” beginning on page 13 of this prospectus.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.


	Per Share	Total
Public offering price	$	$
Underwriting discounts and commissions	$	$
Proceeds to selling stockholders	$	$

The underwriters may also purchase from the selling stockholders up to an additional 349,217 shares of our common stock at the public offering price, less the underwriting discounts and commissions payable by the selling stockholders, to cover over-allotments, if any, within 30 days from the date of this prospectus.

The underwriters are offering the common stock as set forth under “Underwriting.” Delivery of the shares will be made on or about , 2005.

UBS Investment Bank


Jefferies & Company, Inc.		CIBC World Markets

The date of this prospectus is , 2005.

LOGO

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. We have not, and the underwriters have not, authorized anyone to provide you with additional information or information different from that contained in this prospectus. We are offering to sell, and seeking offers to buy, shares of our common stock only in jurisdictions where offers and sales are permitted. The information contained in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date of this prospectus, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of shares of our common stock.

TABLE OF CONTENTS


Prospectus summary		1
Risk factors		13
Special note regarding forward-looking statements		29
Use of proceeds		30
Market price of common stock		31
Dividend policy		32
Capitalization		33
Selected consolidated financial data		34
Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations		38
Industry		64
Business		69


Management		88
Certain relationships and related party transactions		102
Principal and selling stockholders		107
Description of indebtedness		111
Description of capital stock		112
Shares eligible for future sale		116
Material U.S. federal income tax considerations for non-U.S. holders		118
Underwriting		121
Legal matters		125
Experts		125
Where you can find more information		125
Index to financial statements		F-1

In this prospectus, references to “our company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to FreightCar America, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries and its predecessors, except where the context otherwise indicates.

This prospectus contains some of our trademarks, trade names and service marks. Each trademark, trade name or service mark of any other company appearing in this prospectus belongs to its respective holder.

The market and industry data and forecasts included in this prospectus are based upon independent industry sources, including the Association of American Railroads, the Railway Supply Institute, Inc., Economic Planning Associates, Inc., the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy and Resource Data International. Although we believe that these independent sources are reliable, we have not independently verified the accuracy and completeness of this information, nor have we independently verified the underlying economic assumptions relied upon in preparing any forecasts. See “Risk factors—Risks related to our business—The market and industry data included in this prospectus, including estimates and forecasts relating to the growth of the railcar market, cannot be verified with certainty and may prove to be inaccurate.” In addition, we recognize sales of our railcars, which we sometimes refer to as deliveries of our railcars, when we have completed production, the railcars are accepted by the customer following inspection, the risk for any damage or other loss with respect to the railcars passes to the customer and title to the railcars transfers to the customer. Information related to our railcar deliveries is based on our recognized sales. Sales recognition policies of other manufacturers may not necessarily be the same as our policy. However, the industry-wide railcar delivery information included in this prospectus is based, in part, on railcar delivery information that we provided to independent industry sources that recognized deliveries in a given period before title to the railcar transferred to the customer. Therefore, industry information related to railcar deliveries by all manufacturers, which includes information that we have provided, is based on different sales recognition policies than we use. As a result, industry-wide railcar delivery information is not directly comparable to our actual railcar delivery information.

Prospectus summary

This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this prospectus. It is not complete and may not contain all the information that may be important to you. You should read the entire prospectus carefully before making an investment decision, especially the information presented under the heading “Risk factors” and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.

OUR COMPANY

We are the leading manufacturer of aluminum-bodied railroad freight cars, which we also refer to as railcars, in North America, based on the number of railcars delivered. We specialize in the production of coal-carrying railcars, which represented 78% of our deliveries of railcars in 2004 and 91% of our deliveries of railcars in the six months ended June 30, 2005, while the balance of our production consisted of a broad spectrum of railcar types, including aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars. We also refurbish and rebuild railcars and sell forged, cast and fabricated parts for all of the railcars that we produce, as well as those manufactured by others. We have chosen not to offer significant railcar leasing services, as we have made a strategic decision not to compete with our customers that provide railcar leasing services, which represent a significant portion of our revenue.

We believe that we are the leading North American manufacturer of coal-carrying railcars. We estimate that we have manufactured 81% of the coal-carrying railcars delivered over the three years ended December 31, 2004 in the North American market. Our aluminum BethGon railcar has been the leading aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar sold in North America for nearly 20 years. We believe that over the last 25 years we have built and introduced more types of coal-carrying railcars than all other manufacturers in North America combined.

Our manufacturing facilities are located in Danville, Illinois, Johnstown, Pennsylvania and Roanoke, Virginia. Our Danville facility produced approximately 81% of our railcars manufactured during the year ended December 31, 2004 and 61% of our railcars manufactured during the six months ended June 30, 2005. Our Danville facility produced 100% and 68% of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars during the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. We believe that the operational efficiency of our Danville facility has increased over the last six years resulting in a significant reduction in our manufacturing costs. Our Johnstown facility manufactures small covered hopper railcars, coiled steel railcars, aluminum vehicle carrier railcars and aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. In April 2005, we commenced operations at a manufacturing facility that we have leased in Roanoke, Virginia. Our new Roanoke facility has the capability to manufacture a variety of types of railcars, including aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars. We delivered our first railcar manufactured at the Roanoke facility during the second quarter of 2005. See “—Recent developments” below.

Our primary customers are financial institutions, railroads and shippers, which represented 38%, 31% and 31%, respectively, of our total sales attributable to each type of customer for the year ended December 31, 2004, and 28%, 20% and 52%, respectively, of our total sales attributable to each type of customer for the six months ended June 30, 2005. Our sales for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $396.5 million and our net income for the same period was $11.1 million. Our customers that we refer to as financial institution customers include a variety of financial institutions that buy railcars from us and lease such railcars. Our customers that we refer to as shippers include utility companies that use our railcars primarily for coal transport and a variety of industrial companies that use our railcars for freight transport. In 2004, we delivered 7,484 new railcars, including 5,840 aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars, and in the six months ended June 30, 2005, we delivered 5,704 new railcars, including

5,103 aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. Our total backlog of firm orders for new railcars increased from 11,397 railcars as of December 31, 2004 to 15,867 railcars as of June 30, 2005, representing estimated sales of $747.8 million and $1.1 billion, respectively, attributable to such backlog. Our sales for the year ended December 31, 2004 were $482.2 million and our net loss for the same period was $24.9 million.

We and our predecessors have been manufacturing railcars since 1901. From 1923 to 1991, our business was owned and operated by Bethlehem Steel Corporation. In 1991, Transportation Technologies Industries, Inc., or TTII (then known as Johnstown America Industries, Inc.), purchased our business from Bethlehem Steel. In June 1999, TTII sold our railcar business to an investor group led by certain members of TTII’s management who became our management. In December 2004, we changed our name from JAC Holdings International, Inc. to FreightCar America, Inc. to better reflect our business of manufacturing railcars. In April 2005, we completed an initial public offering of shares of our common stock.

OUR INDUSTRY

The North American railcar market is the primary market in which we compete. The North American railcar manufacturing industry has been consolidating over the last 20 years with the number of manufacturers falling from 24 companies in 1980 to six companies today. Of these six companies, four manufacture railcars primarily for third-party customers, while the other two manufacture railcars primarily for their own railcar leasing operations. According to the Association of American Railroads, there were approximately 1.3 million railcars in circulation in 2003, and the number of railcars delivered in the North American market increased from 17,736 railcars in 2002 to 46,871 railcars in 2004. Economic Planning Associates expects estimated railcar deliveries of 66,700 railcars in 2005, 65,000 railcars in 2006, 59,500 railcars in 2007 and 56,350 railcars in 2008, with the reduced estimated deliveries in 2006 reflecting fewer intermodal railcars and platform assemblies and reduced deliveries of box railcars.

We believe the main characteristics and trends affecting the railcar industry are:

the cyclical nature of the railcar market;

the replacement demand for the aging North American railcar fleet;

the shift from steel-bodied to aluminum-bodied railcars;

the shift in the customer base from railroads to financial institutions and shippers; and

the consolidation of railcar manufacturers.

We believe the main trends affecting the coal-carrying railcar business are:

the increase in demand for electricity;

the increase in demand for coal as a fuel source; and

the increase in demand for coal from the western United States.

These trends affecting the railcar industry and the coal-carrying railcar business are summarized in the section entitled “Industry.”

OUR BUSINESS STRENGTHS AND COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES

We believe that the following key business strengths and competitive advantages will contribute to our growth:

Leader in coal-carrying railcar market. We believe we are the leading manufacturer of coal-carrying railcars in North America, producing an estimated 81% of the coal-carrying railcars delivered in the North American market over the three years ended December 31, 2004. Through our leading position in the coal-carrying railcar market, we expect to benefit from the increasing use of coal as an energy source.

Leading manufacturer of aluminum-bodied railcars. Since pioneering the modern aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar design in 1986, we believe that we have introduced more aluminum-bodied railcar types and have manufactured more aluminum-bodied railcars than any other company. We produce aluminum-bodied railcars in each of our facilities in Danville, Illinois, Johnstown, Pennsylvania and Roanoke, Virginia. We plan to leverage our expertise in aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar production as railroads and utilities continue to upgrade their fleets from aging steel-bodied coal-carrying railcars to lighter aluminum-bodied railcars.

Strong relationships with long-term customer base. We have established long-term relationships with a customer base that includes some of the largest financial institutions, railroads and shippers in North America. We believe that our ability to meet our customers’ preference for reliable, high-quality products, the relatively high cost for customers to switch manufacturers, our technological leadership in developing innovative products and the competitive pricing of our railcars have helped us maintain our long-standing relationships with our customers.

Low-cost structure. Over the past several years, we have reduced our fixed costs and have increased our production efficiency through a series of operational changes and the introduction of proprietary production systems. In particular, we believe that the operational efficiency of our Danville facility has increased over the last six years resulting in a significant reduction in our manufacturing costs. We also believe that our Roanoke facility is producing railcars at a competitive cost and efficiency. We also have contractual arrangements with certain of our suppliers and customers that help limit our exposure to fluctuations in material prices. As a result of our low-cost structure, we were able to generate positive cash flow from operations during the most recent cyclical downturn in the railcar industry despite the decline in our sales.

Innovative product development. We continuously seek to create new railcar designs and develop improvements to our existing designs. We have added ten new or redesigned products to our portfolio in the last five years, and railcar designs introduced in the last four years represented 92% of the railcars that we produced in fiscal year 2004 and 91% of the railcars that we produced in the six months ended June 30, 2005.

Stable labor relations. We have a collective bargaining agreement with the union representing the employees at our Danville facility, which expires on November 1, 2008. In November 2004, we entered into a settlement agreement with the union representing our existing and former unionized employees at our Johnstown facility setting forth the terms of a new collective bargaining agreement, which expires on May 15, 2008. The settlement, among other things, limits future liabilities for health care coverage and pension benefits for retired unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. See “—Recent Developments” below. Our employees at our Roanoke facility are not represented by any union.

Strong and experienced management team. We have an experienced senior management team that has an average of over 28 years of experience in the railcar or other manufacturing industries. We believe that our management team has successfully managed our business during the most recent cyclical downturn in the railcar industry, and the continued contributions of our management team will be important for our future success.

OUR STRATEGY

The key elements of our business strategy are as follows:

Maintain leadership in the coal-carrying railcar segment. Since we introduced our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar design in 1986, we have been the leading manufacturer of coal-carrying railcars in North America with an estimated 81% share of the coal-carrying railcars delivered over the three years ended December 31, 2004 in the North American market. We intend to continue to develop new and innovative railcar designs that respond to the needs of our customers, thereby capitalizing on the forecasted growth in coal usage in the United States.

Leverage aluminum expertise into new applications and railcar types. We are applying our expertise in aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar production to develop new types of railcars and related applications. For example, our aluminum vehicle carrier is a competitively priced alternative to a steel vehicle carrier for the efficient transport of new passenger vehicles.

Continue to improve operating efficiencies. We intend to build on the success of our cost improvement initiatives at our Danville facility, and we will continue to identify opportunities to enhance operating efficiencies across our manufacturing facilities, including our Roanoke facility, thereby allowing us to reduce our costs and maintain competitive prices.

Continue to expand our product portfolio. We intend to continue to introduce new and improved railcar designs that respond to the needs of our customers. In addition to developing new aluminum-bodied railcar types, we may seek to expand our product portfolio to additional steel-bodied railcars.

Continue to pursue incremental internal growth and additional external opportunities. As a result of significantly reducing our debt with the net proceeds received in our initial public offering, we have greater financial flexibility to supplement internal growth with select acquisitions. We intend to expand into underserved international markets through licensing arrangements or through joint ventures with established railcar manufacturers. In response to the current demand for our railcars, we are considering the addition of another manufacturing facility and exploring other opportunities to increase our production capacity.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Declaration of dividend. On September 1, 2005, our board of directors declared a cash dividend of $0.03 per share of common stock, payable on September 22, 2005 to holders of record as of September 12, 2005. Shares of our common stock purchased in this offering will not be entitled to receive this dividend.

Initial public offering. In April 2005, we completed an initial public offering of shares of our common stock. In connection with the offering, we offered and sold 5,100,000 shares of our common stock and certain selling stockholders offered and sold 4,675,000 shares at a price of $19.00 per share. The net proceeds that we received from the initial public offering, after deducting underwriting discounts, commissions and estimated offering-related expenses payable by us, were approximately $85.3 million. We used all of our net proceeds from the offering and our available cash to repay our existing indebtedness, redeem all of our outstanding redeemable preferred stock, pay amounts due to shareholders, pay amounts due in connection with the termination of certain management services and other agreements with certain of our stockholders and pay related fees and expenses.

New production facility. In December 2004, we entered into an agreement to lease a railcar manufacturing facility in Roanoke, Virginia. In April 2005, we commenced operations at this manufacturing facility. Our new Roanoke facility has the capability to manufacture a variety of types of

railcars, including aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars. We are initially producing aluminum-bodied railcars and plan to eventually produce both aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars at the Roanoke facility. We delivered our first railcar manufactured at the Roanoke facility during the second quarter of 2005. See “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations—Recent developments” for more information.

Johnstown settlement. On November 15, 2004, our subsidiary, Johnstown America Corporation, or JAC, entered into a settlement agreement with The United Steelworkers of America, or the USWA, which represents our unionized employees in our Johnstown, Pennsylvania manufacturing facility. Our unionized employees at our Johnstown facility, who comprise approximately 38% of our total workforce as of June 30, 2005, had been without a collective bargaining agreement since October 2001. The settlement agreement sets forth the terms of a new 42-month collective bargaining agreement with our unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. The settlement agreement also provides for the resolution of charges made by the USWA against us with the NLRB, certain related class-action lawsuits, which we refer to as the Deemer and Britt lawsuits, and certain workplace grievance matters. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the plaintiffs in the Deemer and Britt lawsuits agreed to withdraw their lawsuits with prejudice and the USWA agreed to request that the NLRB prosecutor withdraw the NLRB charges against us. In addition, the settlement agreement limits our future liabilities for health care coverage and pension benefits for retired unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. The settlement was conditioned on, among other things, obtaining certain third-party approvals. All of the conditions to the effectiveness of the settlement were met as of May 4, 2005. We refer to the settlement agreement and the related matters discussed above as the Johnstown settlement. See “Business—Legal proceedings —Labor dispute settlement.”

CORPORATE INFORMATION

FreightCar America, Inc. is incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware. The address of our principal executive offices is Two North Riverside Plaza, Suite 1250, Chicago, Illinois 60606. Our telephone number is (800) 458-2235. Our web site address is www.freightcaramerica.com. Information contained in or connected to our web site is not a part of this prospectus.

The offering

Unless otherwise indicated, all of the information in this prospectus assumes the underwriters do not exercise their over-allotment option to purchase shares from the selling stockholders. Please see “Description of capital stock” for a summary of the terms of our common stock.

Common stock offered to the public by the selling

stockholders

2,328,115 shares

Common stock outstanding after this offering

12,532,700 shares

Common stock subject to the over-allotment

option granted by the selling stockholders

349,217 shares

Use of proceeds

We will not receive any of the proceeds from this offering.

Dividend policy

We intend to pay regular cash dividends on our common stock commencing in the third quarter of 2005.

Future dividends will be subject to certain considerations discussed under “Risk factors—Risks related to the purchase of our common stock in this offering—We intend to pay regular cash dividends on our common stock commencing in the third quarter of 2005 but we may change our dividend policy, and the agreement governing our revolving credit facility contains various covenants that limit our ability to pay dividends” and “Dividend policy.”

Nasdaq symbol

RAIL

Risk factors

You should carefully read and consider the information set forth under the caption “Risk factors” and all other information set forth in this prospectus before investing in our common stock.

Unless otherwise indicated, all of the information in this prospectus relating to the number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after this offering excludes 329,808 shares of our common stock that will be available for future issuance under stock options granted under our 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan, none of which will be exercisable upon the completion of this offering.

Pursuant to the registration rights agreement between us and the selling stockholders and the selling stockholders’ notice to us relating to the exercise of their registration rights under the registration rights agreement, the selling stockholders have agreed to pay any and all underwriters’ fees and expenses, including commissions and discounts, incurred in connection with this offering. See “Underwriting—Commissions and discounts.” In accordance with the registration rights agreement, we will pay all expenses related to this offering other than the foregoing fees to be paid by the selling stockholders.

Summary consolidated financial data

The following table sets forth our summary consolidated financial data. The consolidated statements of operations and cash flow data for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. The consolidated statements of operations and cash flow data for the period from June 4, 1999 through December 31, 1999 and the years ended December 31, 2000 and 2001 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements not included in this prospectus. The consolidated statements of operations and cash flow data for the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2005 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of June 30, 2005 are derived from our unaudited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus, which, in our opinion, have been prepared on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements and reflect all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of our results of operations and financial position. Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of our results for any future period.

The summary consolidated financial data for the period from January 1, 1999 through June 3, 1999 presented below includes financial data of our predecessor, consisting of certain direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Transportation Technologies Industries, Inc., or TTII, which purchased our business in 1991. On June 4, 1999, we were acquired from TTII by an investor group led by certain members of management of TTII who became our management. The financial data of our predecessor does not reflect any adjustments associated with our acquisition from TTII in 1999, and our consolidated financial data after our acquisition in 1999 is not directly comparable to our predecessor’s financial data.

We have included our summary consolidated financial data for the periods from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999 and from June 4, 1999 to December 31, 1999 in this prospectus because we believe that this additional financial data is useful in illustrating the cyclical nature of our business, which is discussed elsewhere in this prospectus.

The results included below and elsewhere in this document are not necessarily indicative of our future performance. You should read this information together with “Capitalization,” “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations” and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.

Summary Consolidated Financial Data


	Predecessor			FreightCar America, Inc.
	Period from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999			Period from June 4, 1999 to December 31, 1999			Year ended December 31,															Six months ended June 30,
	Period from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999						2000			2001			2002			2003			2004			2004			2005
	(in thousands)
Statements of operations data:
Sales	$	316,931		$	367,742		$	397,577		$	210,314		$	225,497		$	244,349		$	482,180		$	183,813		$	396,519
Cost of sales		271,714			325,640			358,267			187,646			212,589			225,216			468,309			181,294			358,976

Gross profit		45,217			42,102			39,310			22,668			12,908			19,133			13,871			2,519			37,543
Selling, general and administrative expense		8,215			11,397			18,580			13,370			12,778			14,318			14,601			6,993			13,740
Compensation expense under stock option agreements (selling, general and administrative expense)⁽¹⁾		—			—			—			—			—			—			8,900			—			69
Provision for settlement of labor disputes⁽²⁾		—			—			—			—			—			—			9,159			—			370
Goodwill amortization expense		—			1,074			1,812			1,744			—			—			—			—			—

Operating income (loss)		37,002			29,631			18,918			7,554			130			4,815			(18,789	)		(4,474	)		23,364
Interest income		(663	)		(354	)		(1,391	)		(887	)		(162	)		(128	)		(282	)		(52	)		(342	)
Related-party interest expense		—			2,535			5,165			5,723			6,517			6,764			7,029			3,397			3,253
Third-party interest expense		451			3,623			3,999			2,398			1,595			1,367			1,111			531			964
Interest expense and related accretion on rights to additional acquisition consideration⁽³⁾		—			1,192			2,341			2,927			3,659			4,573			5,716			2,598			6,382
Write-off of deferred financing costs		—			—			—			—			—			348			—			—			439
Loss on disposal of railcar lease fleet		—			689			187			—			—			—			—			—			—
Amortization of deferred financing costs		—			410			702			702			702			629			459			270			184

Income (loss) before income taxes		37,214			21,536			7,915			(3,309	)		(12,181	)		(8,738	)		(32,822	)		(11,218	)		12,484
Income tax provision (benefit)		14,398			9,236			6,089			167			(3,554	)		(1,318	)		(7,962	)		(3,197	)		1,425

Net income (loss)		22,816			12,300			1,826			(3,476	)		(8,627	)		(7,420	)		(24,860	)		(8,021	)		11,059
Redeemable preferred stock dividends accumulated, but undeclared		—			620			1,062			1,063			1,062			1,063			1,062			532			311

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders	$	22,816		$	11,680		$	764		$	(4,539	)	$	(9,689	)	$	(8,483	)	$	(25,922	)	$	(8,553	)	$	10,748


	Predecessor		FreightCar America, Inc.
	Period from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999		Period from June 4, 1999 to December 31, 1999		Year ended December 31,														Six months ended June 30,
	Period from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999				2000		2001			2002			2003			2004			2004			2005
	(in thousands, except share and per share data and railcar amounts)
Weighted average common shares outstanding—basic⁽⁴⁾				6,875,000		6,875,000		6,875,000			6,875,000			6,875,000			6,888,750			6,875,000			9,715,020
Weighted average common shares outstanding—diluted⁽⁴⁾				6,875,000		6,875,000		6,875,000			6,875,000			6,875,000			6,888,750			6,875,000			9,723,306

Per share data:
Net income (loss) per share attributable to common shareholders (basic and diluted)⁽⁴⁾			$	1.70	$	0.11	$	(0.66	)	$	(1.41	)	$	(1.23	)	$	(3.76	)	$	(1.24	)	$	1.11


Other financial and operating data:
EBITDA⁽⁵⁾	$	39,492	$	36,985	$	27,407	$	16,479		$	7,747		$	12,186		$	(11,439	)	$	(813	)	$	27,091
Adjusted EBITDA⁽⁵⁾		39,492		36,985		27,407		16,479			7,747			12,186			15,569			5,679			29,030
Items (increasing) decreasing Adjusted EBITDA⁽⁶⁾		—		—		—		(3,056	)		(1,238	)		1,750			12,700			1,701			887
Capital expenditures		1,260		1,998		3,441		2,169			553			369			2,215			728			5,330
New railcars delivered		5,371		6,542		7,126		3,352			3,942			4,550			7,484			3,128			5,704
New railcar orders		3,599		4,046		3,059		4,403			2,831			9,927			12,437			5,103			10,174
New railcar backlog		7,690		5,194		1,127		2,178			1,067			6,444			11,397			8,419			15,867
Estimated backlog⁽⁷⁾	$	435,765	$	295,188	$	56,739	$	108,217		$	55,887		$	365,876		$	747,842		$	540,127		$	1,062,997

Balance sheet data (at period end):
Cash and cash equivalents			$	7,840	$	30,487	$	25,033		$	19,725		$	20,008		$	11,213					$	20,467
Restricted cash⁽⁸⁾				82		3,882		4,061			4,116			11,698			12,955						—
Total assets				186,701		166,972		148,702			141,531			140,052			191,143						186,517
Total debt⁽⁹⁾				65,479		62,476		55,423			53,424			51,778			56,058						36
Rights to additional acquisition consideration, including accumulated accretion⁽¹⁰⁾				9,365		11,707		14,634			18,292			22,865			28,581						—
Total redeemable preferred stock				6,870		7,932		8,995			10,057			11,120			12,182						—
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)				6,935		7,699		3,160			(9,542	)		(19,710	)		(37,089	)					58,530

(1)

On December 7, 2004, in accordance with our then-existing shareholders’ agreement, our board of directors approved the grant of certain options to purchase an aggregate of 1,014 Units to certain of our directors and officers at an exercise price of $0.01 per Unit. The grant became effective on December 23, 2004. Each Unit consisted of 550 shares of our common stock and one share of our Series A voting preferred stock. We have recorded a non-cash expense of $8.9 million based on the estimated value per Unit as of December 23, 2004. All of these options were exercised prior to April 11, 2005 pursuant to which we issued 557,700 shares of our common stock and 1,014 shares of our Series A voting preferred stock, and all of our Series A voting preferred stock was redeemed with the net proceeds from our initial public offering. On April 11, 2005, immediately following the completion of our initial public offering, we granted to certain of our executive officers certain options to purchase an aggregate of 329,808 shares of our common stock under the 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan. We recorded a non-cash charge of $69,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2005 in connection with the issuance of the stock options. See “Management—Executive compensation—Option awards and option plan.”

(2)

On November 15, 2004, we entered into the Johnstown settlement and recorded a $9.2 million charge with respect to the year ended December 31, 2004. As part of the Johnstown settlement, we agreed to pay back wages equal to $1.4 million to the covered employees and recorded a $0.8 million cash charge for expenses related to the Johnstown settlement in the year ended December 31, 2004. We also recorded $7.0 million of non-cash expense in the year ended December 31, 2004 related to pension and postretirement termination benefits accrued with respect to retired unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, we recorded a charge of $370,000 relating to the Johnstown settlement consisting of a retroactive payment to unionized Johnstown employees for certain previously unpaid work hours. See “Business—Legal proceedings—Labor dispute settlement.”

(3)

“Rights to additional acquisition consideration” refers to the additional acquisition consideration related to the acquisition of our business in 1999 that became due, and was paid, upon the completion of our initial public offering in April 2005.

(4)

Share and per share data have been restated to give effect to the merger.

(5)

EBITDA represents net income (loss) before income tax expense, interest expense, net, amortization and depreciation of property and equipment. We believe EBITDA is useful to investors in evaluating our operating performance compared to that of other companies in our industry. In addition, our management uses EBITDA to evaluate our operating performance. The calculation of EBITDA eliminates the effects of financing, income taxes and the accounting effects of capital spending. These items may vary for different companies for reasons unrelated to the overall operating performance of a company’s business. EBITDA is not a financial measure presented in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or U.S. GAAP. Accordingly, when analyzing our operating performance, investors should not consider EBITDA in isolation or as a substitute for net income, cash flows from operating activities or other statements of operations or statements of cash flow data prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Our calculation of EBITDA is not necessarily comparable to that of other similarly titled measures reported by other companies.

With respect to the year ended December 31, 2004, Adjusted EBITDA reflects EBITDA before incurrence of the following charges:

(a)

$9.2 million in connection with the Johnstown settlement. See note (2) above;

(b)

$8.9 million in connection with losses on a customer contract for box railcars, a type of railcar that we had not manufactured in the past, which reflects increased raw material, labor and other costs that exceeded the fixed purchase price under this contract. We had delivered all of the box railcars under this contract as of June 30, 2005, and we do not plan to produce any box railcars in the future; and

(c)

$8.9 million in connection with a non-cash charge reflecting the grant of our 2004 Options.

With respect to the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2005, Adjusted EBITDA reflects EBITDA before incurrence of the following charges:

(a)

$370,000 in connection with the Johnstown settlement, which was recorded in the six months ended June 30, 2005. See note (2) above;

(b)

$6.5 million and $1.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2005, respectively, in connection with losses on a customer contract for box railcars, a type of railcar that we had not manufactured in the past. As of June 30, 2005, we had delivered all of the box railcars under this contract and we do not plan to produce any box railcars in the future; and

(c)

$69,000 in connection with a non-cash charge reflecting the issuance of stock options under the 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan, which was recorded in the six months ended June 30, 2005.

We believe that Adjusted EBITDA is useful to investors evaluating our operating performance compared to that of other companies in our industry because it eliminates the effects of the Johnstown settlement, the losses on a customer contract for box railcars and non-cash expenses relating to the grant of the 2004 Options and stock options under the 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan. We also believe that Adjusted EBITDA is useful to investors in assessing our ability to comply as of the relevant balance sheet dates with the financial covenants under our former revolving credit facility and the senior notes. In addition, Adjusted EBITDA is equivalent to the measure that was used to determine our eligibility to enter into our revolving credit agreement upon the closing of our initial public offering. Adjusted EBITDA is not a financial measure presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Accordingly, when analyzing our operating performance, investors should not consider Adjusted EBITDA in isolation or as a substitute for net income, cash flows from operating activities or other statements of operations or statements of cash flow data prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Our calculation of Adjusted EBITDA is not necessarily comparable to that of other similarly titled measures reported by other companies.

The following is a reconciliation of net income (loss) to EBITDA and then to Adjusted EBITDA:


	Predecessor			FreightCar America, Inc.
	Period from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999			Period from June 4, 1999 to December 3 1999			Year ended December 31,															Six months ended June 30,
	Period from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999			Period from June 4, 1999 to December 3 1999			2000			2001			2002			2003			2004			2004			2005
	(in thousands)
Net income (loss)	$	22,816		$	12,300		$	1,826		$	(3,476	)	$	(8,627	)	$	(7,420	)	$	(24,860	)	$	(8,021	)	$	11,059
Income tax provision (benefit)		14,398			9,236			6,089			167			(3,554	)		(1,318	)		(7,962	)		(3,197	)		1,425
Related-party interest expense		—			2,535			5,165			5,723			6,517			6,764			7,029			3,397			3,253
Third-party interest expense		451			3,623			3,999			2,398			1,595			1,367			1,111			531			964
Interest expense and related accretion on rights to additional acquisition consideration		—			1,192			2,341			2,927			3,659			4,573			5,716			2,598			6,382
Interest income		(663	)		(354	)		(1,391	)		(887	)		(162	)		(128	)		(282	)		(52	)		(342	)
Amortization of deferred financing costs		—			410			702			702			702			629			459			270			184
Write-off of deferred financing costs		—			—			—			—			—			348			—			—			439
Amortization of goodwill		—			1,074			1,812			1,744			—			—			—			—			—
Amortization of intangible assets		677			3,196			632			711			853			591			590			295			295
Depreciation		1,813			3,773			6,232			6,470			6,764			6,780			6,760			3,366			3,432

EBITDA		39,492			36,985			27,407			16,479			7,747			12,186			(11,439	)		(813	)		27,091
Provision for settlement of labor disputes		—			—			—			—			—			—			9,159			—			370
Loss on customer contract for box railcars		—			—			—			—			—			—			8,949			6,492			1,500
Non-cash expense relating to stock-based compensation		—			—			—			—			—			—			8,900			—			69

Adjusted EBITDA	$	39,492		$	36,985		$	27,407		$	16,479		$	7,747		$	12,186		$	15,569		$	5,679		$	29,030

(6)

Our net income (loss), EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA were affected in the specified periods by the following items:

(a)

In the year ended December 31, 2004, an estimated $12.7 million in increased cost of raw materials (excluding an estimated $1.8 million in increased cost of raw materials under the customer contract for box railcars described in note 4(b)), in the six months ended June 30, 2004, an estimated $1.7 million in increased cost of raw materials and, in the six months ended June 30, 2005, an estimated $0.9 million in increased cost of raw materials (excluding an estimated $1.5 million in increased cost of raw materials under the customer contract for box railcars described in note 4(b)), consisting primarily of aluminum and steel, which we were unable to pass on to our customers under our fixed-price customer contracts. As a result of the increased costs, we renegotiated our contracts with a majority of our customers to increase the purchase prices of our railcars to reflect the increased cost of raw materials, and as a result, we were able to pass on to our customers approximately 40% of the increased raw material costs with respect to the railcars that we produced and delivered in 2004. We had four remaining fixed-price contracts reflecting a backlog of 528 railcars out of a total backlog of 11,397 railcars as of December 31, 2004 and one remaining fixed-price contract reflecting a backlog of 66 railcars out of a total backlog of 15,867 railcars as of June 30, 2005. We expect to deliver all of the railcars under the remaining fixed-price contract by September 30, 2005. Other than the remaining fixed-price contract, we have entered into contracts with all of our customers that allow for variable pricing to protect us against future changes in the cost of raw materials;

(b)

For the year ended December 31, 2003, a finder’s fee of $1.8 million that we paid to a third party for securing a major railcar purchase order for us in early 2003, which is included in our selling, general and administrative expense. Our in-house sales personnel generally procure railcar purchase orders, and we do not ordinarily pay finder’s fees to obtain railcar purchase orders; and

(c)

In the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, curtailment gains of $1.2 million and $3.1 million, respectively, related to our postretirement benefit program resulting from our layoff of a significant number of unionized employees at our Johnstown facility.

See “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations” and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.

(7)

Estimated backlog reflects the total sales attributable to the backlog reported at the end of the particular period as if such backlog were converted to actual sales. Estimated backlog does not reflect potential price increases or decreases under most of our customer contracts that provide for variable pricing based on changes in the cost of raw materials or the possibility that contracts may be canceled or railcar delivery dates delayed and does not reflect the effects of any cancellation or delay of railcar orders that may occur. See “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations—Backlog.”

(8)

to a customer that are presently leased by the customer to a third party. Our restricted cash for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 also includes $7.5 million held in a restricted cash account as additional collateral for our former revolving credit facility, which was released to us after we entered into our revolving credit facility, and $1.2 million in escrow, representing security for workers’ compensation insurance. As of June 30, 2005, we no longer had any remaining restricted cash. Restricted cash in the amount of $13.0 million was released during the three months ended June 30, 2005 as follows: the $7.5 million attributable to cash held as additional collateral under the former revolving credit facility was released upon signing the new credit facility agreement; $1.2 million held in escrow as security for worker’s compensation insurance was replaced by a letter of credit; and $4.3 million held in escrow for a residual support guaranty relating to railcars we sold to a financial institution that are leased by a third-party customer was released by the financial institution.

(9)

Our total debt for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004 includes current maturities of long-term debt and our variable rate demand industrial revenue bonds due 2010 which are classified as short-term debt. We repaid all of our debt that existed prior to the initial public offering with the net proceeds of the initial public offering and available cash.

(10)

Our recorded liability under the rights to additional acquisition consideration is based on the fair value of the rights to additional acquisition consideration at the time that we acquired our business from TTII in 1999, using a discount rate of 25% and an expected redemption period of seven years. As a result of our initial public offering, we were required to pay the additional acquisition consideration in the aggregate amount of $35.0 million.

Risk factors

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before you invest in our common stock, you should understand and carefully consider the risks below, as well as all of the other information contained in this prospectus and our financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. Any of these risks could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and the trading price of our common stock, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

RISKS RELATED TO THE RAILCAR INDUSTRY

We operate in a highly cyclical industry. The failure of U.S. economic conditions to continue to improve or the failure of these conditions to result in a sustained economic recovery could adversely affect the demand for our railcar offerings.

Historically, the North American railcar market has been highly cyclical and we expect it to continue to be highly cyclical. During the most recent industry cycle, industry-wide railcar deliveries declined from a peak of 75,704 in 1998 to a low of 17,736 railcars in 2002. During this period, our railcar production declined from approximately 9,000 railcars in 1998 to 4,067 railcars in 2002. In 2004, industry-wide railcar deliveries grew to 46,871, and our railcar production increased to 7,484 railcars. See “Industry—Characteristics and trends affecting the railcar industry—Cyclical nature of the railcar market.” Our industry and the markets for which we supply railcars fluctuate in response to factors that are beyond our control, including U.S. economic conditions. Although the U.S. economy is improving, as indicated by the increase in the U.S. real gross domestic product at an annual rate of 3.4% in the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 4.4% in 2004 following an increase of 3.0% in 2003, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. economic conditions may not continue to improve in the future or result in a sustained economic recovery. In addition, even if a sustained economic recovery occurs in the United States, demand for our railcars may not match or exceed past or expected levels. Downturns in economic conditions could result in lower sales volumes, lower prices for railcars and a loss of profits.

Our industry and demand for railcars may fluctuate in response to factors that are beyond our control. Economic Planning Associates expects estimated railcar deliveries of 66,700 railcars in 2005, 65,000 railcars in 2006, 59,500 railcars in 2007 and 56,350 railcars in 2008, with the reduced estimated deliveries in 2006 reflecting fewer intermodal railcars and platform assemblies and reduced deliveries of box railcars. Fluctuations in the demand for our railcars may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition. In addition, fluctuations may cause comparisons of our sales and operating results between different fiscal years to be less meaningful as indicators of our future performance.

Changes in the rates of electricity usage affect the consumption of coal and, as a result, purchases of coal-carrying railcars, which represented 78% of the railcars we delivered in 2004 and 91% of the railcars we delivered in the six months ended June 30, 2005. Any decline in electricity usage resulting from downturns in economic conditions will intensify the adverse impact on our sales and results of operations. See “Risks related to our business—We rely significantly on the sales of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. Future demand for coal could decrease, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.”

In addition, a substantial number of the end users of our railcars acquire railcars through leasing arrangements with our financial institution customers. Economic conditions that result in higher interest

Risk factors

rates would increase the cost of new leasing arrangements, which could cause our financial institution customers to purchase fewer railcars. A reduction in the number of railcars purchased by our financial institution customers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The current high cost of the raw materials that we use to manufacture railcars, especially aluminum and steel, and delivery delays associated with these raw materials may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The production of railcars and our operations require substantial amounts of aluminum and steel. The cost of aluminum, steel and all other materials (including scrap metal) used in the production of our railcars represents approximately 89% of our direct manufacturing costs. Our business is subject to the risk of price increases and periodic delays in the delivery of aluminum, steel and other materials, all of which are beyond our control. The prices for steel and aluminum, the primary raw material components of our railcars, increased sharply in 2004 as a result of strong demand, limited availability of production inputs for steel and aluminum, including scrap metal, industry consolidation and import trade barriers. The costs of raw steel and aluminum have increased by approximately 155% and 21%, respectively, during the period from October 2003 through June 30, 2005. The availability of scrap metal has been limited by exports of scrap metal to China, and as a result, steel producers have added surcharges on scrap metal in excess of agreed-upon prices. In addition, the price and availability of other railcar components that are made of steel have been adversely affected by the increased cost and limited availability of steel. Any fluctuations in the price or availability of aluminum or steel, or any other material used in the production of our railcars, may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

In addition, if any of our suppliers were unable to continue its business or were to seek bankruptcy relief, the availability or price of the materials we use could be adversely affected. Deliveries of our materials may also fluctuate depending on supply and demand for the material or governmental regulation relating to the material, including regulation relating to the importation of the material.

We have renegotiated our contracts with a majority of our customers to increase the purchase prices of our railcars to reflect the increased cost of raw materials, and as a result, we were able to pass on to our customers approximately 40% of the increased raw material costs with respect to the railcars that we produced and delivered in 2004. In addition, we have entered into customer contracts that allow for variable pricing to protect us against future changes in the cost of raw materials so that, as of June 30, 2005, all but one of our customer contracts allowed for such variable pricing. However, in the year ended December 31, 2004 and in the six months ended June 30, 2004 and June 30, 2005, we were unable to pass on an estimated $12.7 million, $1.7 million and $0.9 million, respectively, in increased raw material costs to our customers under the existing fixed-price customer contracts, and we may not be able to pass on increases in the price of aluminum and/or steel to our customers in the future. In particular, when material prices increase rapidly or to levels significantly higher than normal, we may not be able to pass price increases through to our customers, which could adversely affect our operating margins and cash flows. Even if we are able to increase prices, any such price increases may reduce demand for our railcars. In addition, in the future, our customers may not be willing to accept contractual terms that provide for variable pricing and our competitors, in an effort to gain market share or otherwise, may agree to railcar supply arrangements that do not provide for variable pricing. As a result, we may lose railcar orders or we may be required to agree to supply railcars without variable pricing provisions or be subject to less favorable contract terms.

Risk factors

We depend upon a small number of customers that represent a large percentage of our sales. The loss of any single customer, or a reduction in sales to any such customer, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Since railcars are typically sold pursuant to large, periodic orders, a limited number of customers typically represent a significant percentage of our railcar sales in any given year. Over the last five years, our top five customers in each year based on sales represented, in the aggregate, approximately 54% of our total sales for the five-year period. In 2004, sales to our top three customers accounted for approximately 21%, 10% and 9%, respectively, of our total sales. In the six months ended June 30, 2005, sales to our top three customers accounted for approximately 19%, 16% and 10%, respectively, of our total sales. Although we have long standing relationships with many of our major customers, the loss of any significant portion of our sales to any major customer, the loss of a single major customer or a material adverse change in the financial condition of any one of our major customers could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

The variable purchase patterns of our customers and the timing of completion, delivery and acceptance of customer orders may cause our sales and income from operations to vary substantially each quarter, which will result in significant fluctuations in our quarterly results.

Most of our individual customers do not make purchases every year, since they do not need to replace or replenish their railcar fleets on a yearly basis. Many of our customers place orders for products on an as-needed basis, sometimes only once every few years. As a result, the order levels for railcars, the mix of railcar types ordered and the railcars ordered by any particular customer have varied significantly from quarterly period to quarterly period in the past and may continue to vary significantly in the future. Therefore, our results of operations in any particular quarterly period may be significantly affected by the number of railcars ordered and delivered and product mix of railcars ordered in any given quarterly period. Additionally, because we record the sale of a railcar at the time we complete production, the railcar is accepted by the customer following inspection, the risk for any damage or loss with respect to the railcar passes to the customer and title to the railcar transfers to the customer, and not when the order is taken, the timing of completion, delivery and acceptance of significant customer orders will have a considerable effect on fluctuations in our quarterly results. For example, for the quarters ended September 30, 2004, December 31, 2004, March 31, 2005 and June 30, 2005, our sales were $118.6 million, $179.7 million, $165.8 million and $230.7 million, respectively. As a result of these quarterly fluctuations, we believe that comparisons of our sales and operating results between quarterly periods may not be meaningful and, as such, these comparisons should not be relied upon as indicators of our future performance.

Limitations on the supply of heavy castings, wheels and other railcar components could adversely affect our business because they may limit the number of railcars we can manufacture.

We rely upon third-party suppliers for railcar heavy castings, wheels and other components for our railcars. In particular, we purchase, and we believe most of our competitors purchase, a substantial percentage of our railcar heavy castings and wheels from subsidiaries of Amsted Industries Inc. Due to manufacturing limitations at Amsted Industries, we have only been supplied with a limited number of heavy castings, which has constrained, and which we expect will continue in the future to constrain, our production of railcars. For example, for the year ended December 31, 2004, due to a shortage of heavy castings, our deliveries were limited to 7,484 railcars, even though we had orders and production capacity to manufacture more railcars. Amsted Industries and other suppliers of railcar components

Risk factors

may be unable to meet the short-term or longer-term heavy castings and wheel supply demand of our industry. In the event that Amsted Industries or our other suppliers of railcar components were to stop or reduce the production of heavy castings, wheels or the other railcar components that we use, go out of business, refuse to continue their business relationships with us or become subject to work stoppages, our business would be disrupted. We have in the past experienced and currently experience challenges sourcing these railcar components to meet our increasing production. Our ability to increase our railcar production to expand our business and/or meet any increase in demand, with new or additional manufacturing capabilities, depends on our ability to obtain an adequate supply of these railcar components.

While we believe that we could secure alternative sources, we may incur substantial delays and significant expense in doing so, the quality and reliability of these alternative sources for these components may not be the same and our operating results may be significantly affected. In addition, if one of our competitors entered into a preferred supply arrangement with, or was otherwise favored by, Amsted Industries, we would be at a competitive disadvantage, which could negatively affect our operating results. Furthermore, alternative suppliers might charge significantly higher prices for heavy castings or other railcar components than we currently pay. Under such circumstances, the disruption to our business could have a material adverse impact on our customer relationships, financial condition and operating results.

We operate in a highly competitive industry and we may be unable to compete successfully against other railcar manufacturers.

We operate in a competitive marketplace and face substantial competition from established competitors in the railcar industry in North America. We have three principal competitors that primarily manufacture railcars for third-party customers. In addition, there are two other manufacturers of railcars whose production is used primarily for their own railcar leasing operations, competing directly with financial institutions that provide railcar leasing services, some of which are among our largest customers. Some of these manufacturers have greater financial and technological resources than us, and they may increase their participation in the railcar segments in which we compete. Railcar purchasers’ sensitivity to price and strong price competition within the industry have historically limited our ability to increase prices. In addition to price, competition is based on product performance and technological innovation, quality, reliability of delivery, customer service and other factors. In particular, technological innovation by any of our existing competitors, or new competitors entering any of the markets in which we do business, could put us at a competitive disadvantage. We may be unable to compete successfully against other railcar manufacturers or retain our market share in our established markets. Increased competition for the sales of our railcar products, particularly our coal-carrying railcars, could result in price reductions, reduced margins and loss of market share, which could negatively affect our prospects, business, financial condition and results of operations.

Further consolidation of the railroad industry may adversely affect our business.

Over the past ten years there has been a consolidation of railroad carriers operating in North America. Railroad carriers are large purchasers of railcars and represent a significant portion of our historical customer base. Future consolidation of railroad carriers may adversely affect our sales and reduce our income from operations because with fewer railroad carriers, each railroad carrier will have proportionately greater buying power and operating efficiency, which may intensify competition among railcar manufacturers to retain customer relationships with the consolidated railroad carriers and cause our prices to decline.

Risk factors

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS

We rely significantly on the sales of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. Future demand for coal could decrease, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars are our primary railcar line, representing 68% of our sales in 2004 and 78% of the total railcars that we delivered in 2004 and 85% of our sales and 89% of the total railcars that we delivered in the six months ended June 30, 2005. Fluctuations in the price of coal relative to other energy sources may cause utility companies, which are significant customers of our coal-carrying railcar lines, to select an alternative energy source to coal, thereby reducing the strength of the market for coal-carrying railcars. For example, if utility companies were to begin preferring oil instead of coal as an energy source, demand for our coal-carrying railcar lines would decrease. Although, according to the Energy Information Administration of the Department of Energy, U.S. demand for coal has increased from 1,037.1 million short tons in 1998 to 1,111.5 million short tons in 2004, there is no assurance that U.S. demand for coal will continue to increase. The market for aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars may not remain favorable, and coal may not continue to be a preferred source of energy relative to other energy sources. In addition, our market share in the coal-carrying railcar segment depends on the continued market preference for coal-carrying railcars constructed with aluminum. If purchasers of coal-carrying railcars no longer purchase railcars constructed with aluminum, our market share in this segment may decline and our operating results may be negatively affected.

The U.S. federal and state governments may adopt new legislation and/or regulations, or judicial or administrative interpretations of existing laws and regulations, that materially adversely affect the coal industry and/or our customers’ ability to use coal or to continue to use coal at present rates. Such legislation or proposed legislation and/or regulations may include proposals for more stringent protections of the environment that would further regulate and tax the coal industry. This legislation could significantly reduce demand for coal, adversely affect the demand for our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the United States and over 160 other nations are signatories to the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change, which is intended to limit emissions of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. In December 1997, in Kyoto, Japan, the signatories to the convention, including the United States, established a binding set of emission targets for developed nations. Although the United States has not ratified the emission targets contained in the convention, the emission targets could serve as a guideline for efforts to stabilize or reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, which could adversely impact the price of, and demand for, coal and the demand for our railcars. According to the Energy Information Administration’s Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2003, coal accounts for approximately 36% of carbon dioxide emissions from both energy generating and industrial uses. Carbon dioxide represented 83% of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States in 2003. Efforts to control greenhouse gas emissions could result in reduced use of coal if electricity generators switch to sources of fuel with lower carbon dioxide emissions. If the United States were to adopt comprehensive regulations for its greenhouse gas emissions and/or ratify emissions targets for reduced greenhouse gas emissions (whether under the 1997 Kyoto convention or otherwise), these restrictions could adversely impact the price of and demand for coal, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

Risk factors

We rely upon a single supplier to supply us with all of our cold-rolled center sills for our railcars, and any disruption of our relationship with this supplier could adversely affect our business.

We rely upon a single supplier to manufacture all of our cold-rolled center sills for our railcars, which are based upon our proprietary and patented process. A center sill is the primary longitudinal structural component of a railcar which helps the railcar withstand the weight of the cargo and the force of being pulled during transport. Our center sill is formed into its final shape without heating by passing steel plate through a series of rollers. Approximately 92% of the railcars we produced in 2004, and approximately 96% of the railcars we produced in the six months ended June 30, 2005, were manufactured using this cold-rolled center sill. Although we have a good relationship with our supplier and have not experienced any significant delays, manufacturing shortages or failures to meet our quality requirements and production specifications in the past, our supplier could stop production of our cold-rolled center sills, go out of business, refuse to continue its business relationship with us or become subject to work stoppages. While we believe that we could secure alternative manufacturing sources, our present supplier is currently the only manufacturer of our cold-rolled center sills for our railcars. We may incur substantial delays and significant expense in finding an alternative source, our results of operations may be significantly affected, and the quality and reliability of these alternative sources may not be the same. Moreover, alternative suppliers might charge significantly higher prices for our cold-rolled center sills than we currently pay. The prices for our cold-rolled center sills may also be impacted by the rising cost of steel and all other materials used in the production of our cold-rolled center sills. Under such circumstances, the disruption to our business may have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Equipment failures, delays in deliveries or extensive damage to our facilities, particularly our facility in Danville, could lead to production or service curtailments or shutdowns.

We manufacture our railcars at production facilities in Danville, Illinois, Johnstown, Pennsylvania and Roanoke, Virginia. An interruption in production capabilities at these facilities, as a result of equipment failure or other reasons, could reduce or prevent the production of our railcars. A halt of production at any of our manufacturing facilities, particularly at our Danville facility which manufactured approximately 81% of our railcars manufactured during the year ended December 31, 2004 and 61% of our railcars manufactured during the six months ended June 30, 2005, and manufactured 100% and 68% of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars during the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively, could severely affect delivery times to our customers. Any significant delay in deliveries to our customers could result in the termination of contracts, cause us to lose future sales and negatively affect our reputation among our customers and in the railcar industry and our results of operations. Our facilities are also subject to the risk of catastrophic loss due to unanticipated events, such as fires, explosions, floods or weather conditions. We may experience plant shutdowns or periods of reduced production as a result of equipment failures, delays in deliveries or extensive damage to any of our facilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

An increase in health care costs could adversely affect our results of operations.

The cost of health care benefits in the United States has increased significantly, leading to higher costs for us to provide health care benefits to our active and retired employees, and we expect these costs to increase in the future. If these costs continue to rise, our results of operations will be adversely affected. We are unable to limit our costs by changing or eliminating coverage under our employee benefit plans because a significant majority of our employee benefits are governed by union agreements. For example,

Risk factors

as a result of the Johnstown settlement, we expect to make payments of $2.8 million in 2005 (of which $1.4 million has been paid as of June 30, 2005) and $3.1 million in 2006 for health care coverage costs of our retired employees at our Johnstown facility. As of December 31, 2004, our accumulated postretirement benefit obligation was $54.0 million. Although the Johnstown settlement limits our future liabilities for health care coverage for our retired unionized Johnstown employees, we will continue to fund 100% of the health care coverage costs of our active unionized and non-unionized employees at our Johnstown facility and all of our active employees at our Danville facility. If our costs under our employee benefit plans for active employees at our Danville facility exceed our projections, our business and financial results could be materially adversely affected. See “Business—Legal proceedings—Labor dispute settlement.”

Our pension obligations are currently underfunded. We may have to make significant cash payments to our pension plans which would reduce the cash available for our business.

As of December 31, 2004, our accumulated benefit obligation under our defined benefit pension plans exceeded the fair value of plan assets by $18.5 million. The underfunding was caused, in part, by fluctuations in the financial markets that have caused the valuation of the assets in our defined benefit pension plans to decrease. Further, additional benefit obligations were added to our existing defined benefit pension plans on November 15, 2004 as a result of the Johnstown settlement and the reduction in our discount rate. We made contributions to our pension plans of $4.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2004 and $1.7 million during the six months ended June 30, 2005. We expect total contributions to our defined benefit pension plans for 2005 to be approximately $4.0 million. Management expects that any future obligations under our pension plans that are not currently funded will be funded from our future cash flow from operations. If our contributions to our pension plans are insufficient to fund the pension plans adequately to cover our future pension obligations, the performance of the assets in our pension plans does not meet our expectations or other actuarial assumptions are modified, our contributions to our pension plans could be materially higher than we expect, which would reduce the cash available for our business.

The level of our reported backlog may not necessarily indicate what our future sales will be and our actual sales may fall short of the estimated sales value attributed to our backlog.

We define backlog as the sales value of products or services to which our customers have committed in writing to purchase from us which have not been recognized as sales. In this prospectus, we have disclosed our backlog, or the number of railcars for which we have purchase orders, in various periods and the estimated sales value (in dollars) that would be attributable to this backlog once the backlog is converted to actual sales. We consider backlog to be an indicator of future sales of railcars. However, our reported backlog may not be converted into sales in any particular period, if at all, and the actual sales (including any compensation for lost profits and reimbursement for costs) from such contracts may not equal our reported estimates of backlog value. For example, we rely on third-party suppliers for heavy castings, wheels and components for our railcars and if these third parties were to stop or reduce their supply of heavy castings, wheels and other components, our actual sales would fall short of the estimated sales value attributed to our backlog. Also, customer orders may be subject to cancellation, inspection rights and other customary industry terms, and delivery dates may be subject to delay, thereby extending the date on which we will deliver the associated railcars and realize revenues attributable to such railcar backlog. Furthermore, any contract included in our reported backlog that actually generates sales may not be profitable. Therefore, our current level of reported backlog may not necessarily represent the level of sales that we may generate in any future period.

Risk factors

As a public company, we are required to comply with the reporting obligations of the Exchange Act and Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. If we fail to comply with the reporting obligations of the Exchange Act and Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act or if we fail to achieve and maintain adequate internal controls over financial reporting, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

As a public company, we are required to comply with the periodic reporting obligations of the Exchange Act, including preparing annual reports and quarterly reports. Our failure to prepare and disclose this information in a timely manner could subject us to penalties under federal securities laws, expose us to lawsuits and restrict our ability to access financing. In addition, we are required under applicable law and regulations to integrate our systems of internal controls over financial reporting, and we are presently evaluating our existing internal controls with respect to the standards adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. During the course of our evaluation, we may identify areas requiring improvement and may be required to design enhanced processes and controls to address issues identified through this review. This could result in significant delays and costs to us and require us to divert substantial resources, including management time, from other activities. During the audits of our 2003 and 2004 fiscal years, our independent registered public accounting firm issued letters to our audit committee noting matters which could inhibit our ability to meet our reporting obligations when we became a public company and matters in our internal controls and operations that they deemed to constitute a reportable condition. The reportable condition generally related to the adequacy of our financial accounting and reporting resources and related infrastructure to support our financial accounting needs, including our needs as we became a public company. These include, but are not limited to, our SEC reporting skills and our plan and related resources for compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The letters from our independent registered public accounting firm concluded that the reportable condition described above is a material weakness.

On September 2, 2005, our management and audit committee determined to restate our audited consolidated financial statements for 2002, 2003 and 2004 and our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2005, and the six months ended June 30, 2004. This determination resulted from our review of accounting literature and recent interpretations and a reevaluation of our accounting for changes in restricted cash balances under the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 95, Statement of Cash Flows, as reported in our consolidated statements of cash flows. Pursuant to Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Auditing Standard No. 2, Paragraph 140, these restatements reflect a material weakness in internal control over financial reporting. In connection with this restatement, we reevaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures. Solely as a result of this material weakness, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of March 31, 2005. However, as of the date hereof, our management has determined that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

Since November 2004, we have taken a number of steps that we believe have improved the effectiveness of our financial accounting and reporting processes and have added to and enhanced our resources and related infrastructure to support our financial accounting needs. We have engaged a consulting firm to assist us in the analysis of, and planning for, improving our internal controls, as well as the implementation of such plans. In addition, we have added individuals to our accounting staff to enhance the control environment. Management has closely monitored our accounting processes and has noted significant improvements. We believe we have satisfactorily addressed the reportable condition described in the letter from our independent registered public accounting firm as a material weakness and plan to continue to closely monitor our accounting processes. However, we cannot be certain at this time that we

Risk factors

will be able to comply with all of our reporting obligations and successfully complete the procedures, certification and attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 by the time that we are required to file our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2006. If we fail to achieve and maintain the adequacy of our internal controls and do not address the deficiencies identified in the letter received by our audit committee, we may not be able to ensure that we can conclude on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Moreover, effective internal controls are necessary for us to produce reliable financial reports and are important to help prevent fraud. As a result, any failure to satisfy the requirements of Section 404 on a timely basis could result in the loss of investor confidence in the reliability of our financial statements, which in turn could harm our business and negatively impact the trading price of our common stock.

If we lose key personnel, our operations and ability to manage the day-to-day aspects of our business will be adversely affected.

We believe our success depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of our executive officers and key employees, both individually and as a group. Our future performance will substantially depend on our ability to retain and motivate them. If we lose key personnel or are unable to recruit qualified personnel, our ability to manage the day-to-day aspects of our business will be adversely affected.

The loss of the services of one or more members of our senior management team could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Because our senior management team has many years of experience with our company and within the railcar industry and other manufacturing industries, it would be difficult to replace any of them without adversely affecting our business operations. Our future success will also depend in part upon our continuing ability to attract and retain highly qualified personnel. We do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance.

Labor disputes could disrupt our operations and divert the attention of our management and may have a material adverse effect on our operations and profitability.

Approximately 71% of our employees, as of June 30, 2005, are members of unions. We have a collective bargaining agreement with the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Workers of America, or the UAW, representing approximately 90% of our employees at the Danville facility. Our employees at our Roanoke facility are not represented by any union. Our employees at our Johnstown facility represented by the USWA had been without a collective bargaining agreement since October 2001. The USWA, which represents approximately 81% of our employees at the Johnstown facility and approximately 38% of our total active labor force as of June 30, 2005, filed charges in January 2002 against our subsidiary alleging unfair labor practices in violation of the National Labor Relations Act, or the NLRA, in connection with our practices during our negotiation of a new collective bargaining agreement. In addition, our subsidiary was a defendant in the Deemer and Britt lawsuits, two class action lawsuits filed by the USWA on behalf of individual plaintiffs alleging violations of the NLRA and ERISA in connection with certain medical and life insurance benefits and pension supplements that were discontinued with respect to certain retirees. On November 15, 2004, our subsidiary entered into a settlement agreement setting forth the terms of a new collective bargaining agreement with the USWA which expires on May 15, 2008. The Johnstown settlement also resolved the NLRB charges filed against our subsidiary relating to the collective bargaining agreement, the Deemer and Britt lawsuits and certain other outstanding workplace grievances matters. See “Business—Legal proceedings—Labor dispute

Risk factors

settlement.” Although the disputes involving the USWA did not result in strikes or other labor protests, any future labor disputes with the USWA or the UAW could result in strikes or other labor protests which could disrupt our operations and divert the attention of our management from operating our business. If we were to experience a strike or work stoppage, it would be difficult for us to find a sufficient number of employees with the necessary skills to replace these employees. Any such labor disputes could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Lack of acceptance of our new railcar offerings by our customers could adversely affect our business.

Our strategy depends in part on our continued development and sale of new railcar designs and design changes to existing railcars to penetrate railcar markets in which we currently do not compete and to expand or maintain our market share in the railcar markets in which we currently compete. We have dedicated significant resources to the development, manufacturing and marketing of new railcar designs. We typically make decisions to develop and market new railcars and railcars with modified designs without firm indications of customer acceptance. New or modified railcar designs may require customers to alter their existing business methods or threaten to displace existing equipment in which our customers may have a substantial capital investment. Many railcar purchasers prefer to maintain a standardized fleet of railcars and railcar purchasers with established railcar fleets are generally resistant to railcar design changes. Therefore, any new or modified railcar designs that we develop may not gain widespread acceptance in the marketplace and any such products may not be able to compete successfully with existing railcar designs or new railcar designs that may be introduced by our competitors.

Our production of new railcar product lines may not be initially profitable and may result in financial losses.

When we begin production of a new railcar product line, we usually anticipate that our initial costs of production will be higher due to initial labor and operating inefficiencies associated with new manufacturing processes. Due to pricing pressures in our industry, the pricing for the new railcars in customer contracts usually does not reflect the initial additional costs, and our costs of production may exceed the anticipated revenues until we are able to gain labor efficiencies. For example, in 2004 and in the six months ended June 30, 2005, we had losses of $8.9 million and $1.5 million, respectively, relating to our contract for the manufacture of box railcars, a type of railcar that we had not manufactured in the past. To the extent that the total costs of production significantly exceed our anticipated costs of production, we may be unable to gain any profit from our sale of the railcars or we may incur a loss.

We may pursue acquisitions that involve inherent risks, any of which may cause us not to realize anticipated benefits.

Our business strategy includes the potential acquisition of businesses and entering into joint ventures and other business combinations that we expect would complement and expand our existing products and services and the markets where we sell our products and services and improve our market position. We may not be able to successfully identify suitable acquisition or joint venture opportunities or complete any particular acquisition, combination, joint venture or other transaction on acceptable terms. We cannot predict the timing and success of our efforts to acquire any particular business and integrate the acquired business into our existing operations. Also, efforts to acquire other businesses or the implementation of other elements of this business strategy may divert managerial resources away from our business operations. In addition, our ability to engage in strategic acquisitions may depend on our

Risk factors

ability to raise substantial capital and we may not be able to raise the funds necessary to implement our acquisition strategy on terms satisfactory to us, if at all. Our failure to identify suitable acquisition or joint venture opportunities may restrict our ability to grow our business. In addition, we may not be able to successfully integrate businesses that we acquire in the future, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We might fail to adequately protect our intellectual property, which may result in our loss of market share, or third parties might assert that our intellectual property infringes on their intellectual property, which would be costly to defend and divert the attention of our management.

The protection of our intellectual property is important to our business. We rely on a combination of trademarks, copyrights, patents and trade secrets to protect our intellectual property. However, these protections might be inadequate. For example, we have patents for portions of our railcar designs that are important to our market leadership in the coal-carrying railcar segment. Our pending or future trademark, copyright and patent applications might not be approved or, if allowed, they might not be sufficiently broad. Conversely, third parties might assert that our technologies or other intellectual property infringe on their proprietary rights. In either case, litigation may result, which could result in substantial costs and diversion of our and our management team’s efforts. Regardless of whether we are ultimately successful in any litigation, such litigation could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We are subject to a variety of environmental laws and regulations and the cost of complying with environmental requirements or any failure by us to comply with such requirements may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to a variety of federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations, including those governing air quality and the handling, disposal and remediation of waste products, fuel products and hazardous substances. Although we believe that we are in material compliance with all of the various regulations and permits applicable to our business, we may not at all times be in compliance with such requirements. The cost of complying with environmental requirements may also increase substantially in future years. If we violate or fail to comply with these regulations, we could be fined or otherwise sanctioned by regulators. In addition, these requirements are complex, change frequently and may become more stringent over time, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. We have in the past conducted investigation and remediation activities at properties that we own to address historic contamination. However, there can be no assurance that these remediation activities have addressed all historic contamination. Environmental liabilities that we incur, including those relating to the off-site disposal of our wastes, if they are not covered by adequate insurance or indemnification, will increase our costs and have a negative impact on our profitability. See “Business—Environmental matters” for more information.

Our warranties may expose us to potentially significant claims, which may damage our reputation and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We warrant the workmanship and materials of many of our manufactured new products under limited warranties, generally for periods of five years or less. Accordingly, we may be subject to a risk of product liability or warranty claims in the event that the failure of any of our products results in personal injury

Risk factors

or death, or does not conform to our customers’ specifications. Although we currently maintain product liability insurance coverage, product liability claims, if made, may exceed our insurance coverage limits or insurance may not continue to be available on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. We have never experienced any material losses attributable to warranty claims, but it is possible for these types of warranty claims to result in costly product recalls, significant repair costs and damage to our reputation, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations.

We use and rely significantly on a proprietary software system to manage our accounting and production systems, the failure of which may lead to data loss, significant business interruption and financial loss.

We use and rely significantly on a proprietary software system that integrates our accounting and production systems, including quality control, purchasing, inventory control and accounts receivable systems. In the future, we may discover significant errors or defects in this software system that we may not be able to correct. If this software system is disrupted or fails for any reason, or if our systems or facilities are infiltrated or damaged by unauthorized persons or a software virus, we could experience data loss, financial loss and significant business interruption. If that happens, we may be unable to meet production targets, our customers may terminate contracts, our reputation may be negatively affected, and there could be a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

The agreement governing our revolving credit facility contains various covenants that, among other things, limit our discretion in operating our business and provide for certain minimum financial requirements.

The agreement governing our revolving credit facility contains various covenants that, among other things, limit our management’s discretion by restricting our ability to:

incur additional debt;

redeem our capital stock;

enter into certain transactions with affiliates;

pay dividends and make other distributions;

make investments and other restricted payments; and

create liens.

Our failure to comply with the financial covenants set forth above and other covenants under our revolving credit facility could lead to an event of default under the agreements governing any other indebtedness that we may have outstanding at the time, permitting the lenders to accelerate all borrowings under such agreements and to foreclose on any collateral. In addition, any such events may make it more difficult or costly for us to borrow additional amounts in the future. The terms of our revolving credit facility are summarized under “Description of indebtedness.”

The market and industry data contained in this prospectus, including estimates and forecasts relating to the growth of the railcar market, cannot be verified with certainty and may prove to be inaccurate.

This prospectus contains market and industry data, obtained primarily from reports published by the Association of American Railroads, the Railway Supply Institute, Economic Planning Associates, Inc., the Energy Information Administration of the Department of Energy and Resource Data International.

Risk factors

Industry publications typically indicate that they have derived the published data from sources believed to be reasonable, including other railcar manufacturers, but do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the data. While we believe these industry publications to be reliable, we have not independently verified the data or any of the assumptions on which the estimates and forecasts are based, and the data may prove to be inaccurate. This data includes estimates and forecasts regarding future growth in these industries, specifically data related to railcar production, railcar freight growth and the historical average age of active railcars in North America. Forecasts and estimates regarding future growth of the railcar industry included in these reports are based on assumptions of the growth and improvement of the U.S. economy. The growth and improvement of the U.S. economy during the period of these forecasts and estimates are not assured. The failure of the U.S. economy to perform as assumed in these forecasts and estimates would cause the forecasted expansion of the railcar industry not to occur or occur to a lesser extent than predicted. The failure of the rail industry and/or the railcar supply industry, including the coal-carrying railcar business, to continue to grow as forecasted by the market and industry data included in this prospectus may have a material adverse effect on our business and the market price of our common stock.

To the extent we expand our sales of products and services internationally, we will increase our exposure to international economic and political risks.

Conducting business outside the United States subjects us to various risks, including changing economic, legal and political conditions, work stoppages, exchange controls, currency fluctuations, terrorist activities directed at U.S. companies, armed conflicts and unexpected changes in the United States and the laws of other countries relating to tariffs, trade restrictions, transportation regulations, foreign investments and taxation. If we fail to obtain and maintain certifications of our railcars and railcar parts in the various countries where we may operate, we may be unable to market and sell our railcars in those countries.

In addition, unexpected changes in regulatory requirements, tariffs and other trade barriers, more stringent rules relating to labor or the environment, adverse tax consequences and price exchange controls could limit our operations and make the manufacture and distribution of our products internationally more difficult. Furthermore, any material changes in the quotas, regulations or duties on imports imposed by the U.S. government and agencies or on exports by non-U.S. governments or their respective agencies could affect our ability to export the railcars that we manufacture in the United States. The uncertainty of the legal environment could limit our ability to enforce our rights effectively.

RISKS RELATED TO THE PURCHASE OF OUR COMMON STOCK IN THIS OFFERING

The price of our common stock is subject to volatility, which may make it more difficult to realize a gain on your investment in our common stock, and may be susceptible to declines based on securities analysts’ or industry research and reports.

Various factors, such as general economic changes in the financial markets, announcements or significant developments with respect to the global rail or railcar industry, actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly or annual financial results, the introduction of new products or technologies by us or our competitors, changes in other conditions or trends in our industry or in the markets of any of our significant customers, changes in governmental regulation, our financial results failing to meet expectations of analysts or investors or changes in securities analysts’ estimates of our future performance or of that of our competitors or our industry, could cause the market price of our common stock to fluctuate substantially. In addition, our customers’ practice of placing large, periodic orders for

Risk factors

products on an as needed basis makes our quarterly sales and operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results in some quarters to vary from market expectations and also lead to volatility in our stock price.

In addition, the trading market for our common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts who cover us or our industry downgrade our stock or project a downturn in our industry, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Our stock price may decline due to sales of shares by our stockholders.

Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, or the perception that these sales may occur, may adversely affect the price of our common stock and impede our ability to raise capital through the issuance of equity securities in the future. There will be 12,532,700 shares of our common stock outstanding immediately after this offering. Sales of a substantial number of our shares of common stock in the public market in this offering could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Upon completion of this offering, the holders of approximately 429,585 shares of common stock (80,368 shares of common stock if the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in full) will be entitled to registration rights with respect to these shares pursuant to a registration rights agreement. These shares will be “restricted securities” as defined in Rule 144 of the Securities Act and also subject to the 90-day “lock-up” restrictions described in the “Underwriting” section of this prospectus. Following the expiration or waiver, which UBS Securities LLC may do without notice, of the 90-day “lock-up” restrictions and subject to the conditions set forth in the registration rights agreement, the holders of these shares may require us to register the resale of substantially all of these shares upon demand. Shares issuable upon exercise of our options also may be sold in the market in the future, subject to any restrictions on resale following underwritten offerings contained in our option agreements, and sales of substantial amounts of those shares, or the perception that these sales may occur, also may adversely affect the price of our common stock. See “Shares eligible for future sale.”

Following the expiration of the lock-up period under the lock-up agreements entered into by our directors, executive officers and the selling stockholders in connection with this offering, certain stockholders under our registration rights agreement are entitled, subject to certain exceptions, to exercise their demand registration rights to register their shares under the Securities Act. This right has been exercised by each of the selling stockholders in connection with this offering. By exercising their registration rights and selling a large number of shares, these holders could cause the price of our common stock to decline. See “Shares eligible for future sale,” “Certain relationships and related party transactions—Registration rights agreement” and “Description of capital stock—Registration rights.”

We may require additional capital in the future and sales of our equity securities to provide this capital may dilute your ownership in us.

We may need to raise additional funds through public or private equity financings in order to:

expand and grow our business;

develop new services and products;

respond to competitive pressures; or

acquire complementary businesses or technologies.

Risk factors

Any additional capital raised through the sale of our equity securities may dilute your percentage ownership interest in us.

We intend to pay regular cash dividends on our common stock commencing in the third quarter of 2005 but we may change our dividend policy, and the agreement governing our revolving credit facility contains various covenants that limit our ability to pay dividends.

Our board of directors has never paid any cash dividends on our common stock. On September 1, 2005, our board of directors declared a cash dividend of $0.03 per share of common stock, payable on September 22, 2005 to holders of record as of September 12, 2005. Following the payment of this dividend, we intend to pay regular cash dividends. Our board of directors may, in its discretion, decrease the level of dividends or discontinue the payment of dividends entirely. In addition, the terms of our revolving credit facility limit our ability to pay dividends to holders of our common stock. The terms of our revolving credit facility are summarized under “Description of indebtedness.” In addition, as a holding company, we are dependent upon the ability of our subsidiaries to generate earnings and cash flows and distribute them to us so that we may pay our obligations and expenses and pay dividends to our stockholders. We cause each of our subsidiaries to pay dividends to us, the sole stockholder of such subsidiaries. However, the ability of each of our subsidiaries to make such distributions will be subject to its operating results, cash requirements and financial condition, applicable laws and its other agreements with third parties. In addition, under Delaware law, our board of directors may declare dividends only to the extent of our “surplus” (which is defined as total assets at fair market value minus total liabilities, minus statutory capital), or if there is no surplus, out of our net profits for the then-current and/or immediately preceding fiscal years. Accordingly, we may not be able to pay dividends in any given amount in the future, or at all.

Delaware law and our certificate of incorporation and by-laws contain provisions that could delay and discourage takeover attempts that stockholders may consider favorable.

Certain provisions of our certificate of incorporation and by-laws and applicable provisions of Delaware corporate law may make it more difficult for or prevent a third party from acquiring control of us or changing our board of directors and management. These provisions include:

our board of directors is divided into three staggered classes, each with three-year terms;

the ability by our board of directors to issue preferred stock with voting or other rights or preferences;

only our board of directors or the chairman of the board of directors may call special meetings of our stockholders;

our stockholders may only take action at a meeting of our stockholders and not by written consent; and

our stockholders must comply with advance notice procedures in order to nominate candidates for election to our board of directors or to place stockholders’ proposals on the agenda for consideration at meetings of the stockholders.

Any delay or prevention of a change of control transaction or changes in our board of directors or management could deter potential acquirors or prevent the completion of a transaction in which our stockholders could receive a substantial premium over the then-current market price for their shares.

Risk factors

As a result of being a public company, we incur increased costs that may place a strain on our resources and our management’s attention may be diverted from other business concerns.

As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as new rules subsequently implemented by the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and Nasdaq, have required changes in corporate governance practices of public companies. Compliance with these rules and regulations has increased our legal and financial compliance costs and is expected to make some activities more time-consuming and costly. These requirements may place a strain on our systems and resources. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, requires that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls for financial reporting. We currently do not have an internal audit group. Significant resources and management oversight have been dedicated to maintaining and improving the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. This may divert management’s attention from other business concerns, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

These new rules and regulations have made it more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we have incurred substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors or as executive officers. We are currently evaluating and monitoring developments with respect to these new rules, and we cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur or the timing of such costs.

This offering may cause us to undergo an “ownership change” for purposes of Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code, which may limit our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforward and certain other tax attributes.

Our federal net operating loss carryforward as of December 31, 2004 is approximately $11.5 million. Under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50% change (by value) in its equity ownership over a three-year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change of control net operating loss carryforward and other pre-change tax attributes against its post-change income may be limited. Although no definite determination can be made at this time, there is a significant possibility that this offering (along with other changes in ownership that have occurred within a three-year testing period) will cause us to undergo an ownership change under the Internal Revenue Code. In addition, if we undergo an ownership change, we may be limited in our ability to use certain “built-in losses” or “built-in deductions” that exist at the time of the ownership change. These limitations may have the effect of reducing our after-tax cash flow. Even if this offering does not cause an ownership change to occur, we may undergo an ownership change after the offering due to subsequent changes in ownership of our common stock.

Special note regarding forward-looking statements

This prospectus contains some forward-looking statements including, in particular, statements about our plans, strategies and prospects. We have used the words “may,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “plan,” “intend” and similar expressions in this prospectus to identify forward-looking statements. We have based these forward-looking statements on our current views with respect to future events and financial performance. Our actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements.

Our forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including:

the cyclical nature of our business;

adverse economic and market conditions;

fluctuating costs of raw materials, including steel and aluminum, and delays in the delivery of raw materials;

our ability to maintain relationships with our suppliers of railcar components;

our reliance upon a small number of customers that represent a large percentage of our sales;

the variable purchase patterns of our customers and the timing of completion, delivery and acceptance of customer orders;

the highly competitive nature of our industry;

risks relating to our relationship with our unionized employees and their unions;

our ability to manage our health care and pension costs;

our reliance on the sales of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars;

the risk of lack of acceptance of our new railcar offerings by our customers;

the cost of complying with environmental laws and regulations;

the costs associated with being a public company;

potential significant warranty claims; and

various covenants in the agreement governing our indebtedness that limit our management’s discretion in the operation of our businesses.

Our actual results could be different from the results described in or anticipated by our forward-looking statements due to the inherent uncertainty of estimates, forecasts and projections and may be better or worse than anticipated. Given these uncertainties, you should not rely on forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements represent our estimates and assumptions only as of the date that they were made. We expressly disclaim any duty to provide updates to forward-looking statements, and the estimates and assumptions associated with them, after the date of this prospectus, in order to reflect changes in circumstances or expectations or the occurrence of unanticipated events except to the extent required by applicable securities laws. All of the forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to the factors discussed above under “Risk factors.” We caution you that these risks may not be exhaustive. We operate in a continually changing business environment and new risks emerge from time to time. You should carefully read this prospectus in its entirety as it contains information you should consider when making your investment decision.

Use of proceeds

We will not receive any proceeds from this offering.

The selling stockholders have agreed to pay all underwriters’ commissions and discounts in connection with this offering. In accordance with a registration rights agreement entered into with the selling stockholders, we will pay all expenses related to this offering other than the foregoing fees to be paid by the selling stockholders.

Market price of common stock

Our common stock has been quoted on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol “RAIL” since April 6, 2005. Prior to that time, there was no public market for our common stock. The following table sets forth the quarterly high and low closing prices of our common stock since April 6, 2005, as reported on the Nasdaq National Market.


	Common stock price
	High		Low
Second quarter (from April 6, 2005)	$	22.00	$	17.55
Third quarter (through September 2, 2005)	$	38.25	$	19.01

On September 2, 2005, the last sale price per share for our common stock as reported on the Nasdaq National Market was $37.98 per share. As of September 2, 2005, there were approximately 37 holders of record of our common stock, which does not include persons whose shares of common stock are held by a bank, brokerage house or clearing agency.

Dividend policy

Shares of our common stock purchased in this offering will not be entitled to receive this dividend. Following this offering, we intend to pay regular cash dividends on our common stock.

We are a holding company and, as such, our ability to pay dividends is subject to the ability of our subsidiaries to generate earnings and cash flows and distribute them to us. Our declaration and payment of future dividends will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on, among other things, general economic and business conditions, our strategic plans, our financial results, contractual and legal restrictions on the payment of dividends by us and our subsidiaries and such other factors as our board of directors considers to be relevant.

Our revolving credit facility contains covenants that limit our ability to pay dividends to holders of our common stock except under certain circumstances. Additionally, the ability of our board of directors to declare a dividend on our common stock is limited by Delaware law. For certain risks and restrictions relating to the payment of dividends, see “Risk factors—Risks related to the purchase of our common stock in this offering—We intend to pay regular cash dividends on our common stock commencing in the third quarter of 2005 but we may change our dividend policy, and the agreement governing our revolving credit facility contains various covenants that limit our ability to pay dividends.”

Capitalization

The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and capitalization as of June 30, 2005.

You should read this table together with “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations” and the consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus.


	As of June 30, 2005
	(in thousands, except share amounts)
Cash and cash equivalents	$	20,467

Long-term debt (including current maturities)⁽¹⁾
Capital lease	$	36

Stockholders’ equity
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; 2,500,000 shares authorized (100,000 shares each designated as Series A voting and Series B non-voting); 0 shares issued and outstanding		—
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share; 50,000,000 shares authorized, 12,532,700 shares issued and outstanding⁽²⁾		125
Additional paid in capital		93,646
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(5,055	)
Accumulated deficit		(30,186	)

Total stockholders’ equity		58,530

Total capitalization	$	58,566

(1)

As of June 30, 2005, we had no outstanding borrowings under the revolving credit facility, we had $9.0 million in letters of credit under the letter of credit sub-facility and we had the ability to borrow $38.1 million under the revolving credit facility.

(2)

Does not include 329,808 shares of our common stock that are available for future issuance under stock options granted under our 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan. See “Management—Executive compensation—Option awards and option plan.”

Selected consolidated financial data

The following table sets forth our selected consolidated financial data. The consolidated statements of operations and cash flow data for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2003 and 2004 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. The consolidated statements of operations and cash flow data for the period from June 4, 1999 through December 31, 1999 and the years ended December 31, 2000 and 2001 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements not included in this prospectus. The consolidated statements of operations and cash flow data for the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2005 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of June 30, 2005 are derived from our unaudited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus, which, in our opinion, have been prepared on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements and reflect all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of our results of operations and financial position. Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of our results for any future period.

The selected consolidated financial data for the period from January 1, 1999 through June 3, 1999 presented below includes financial data of our predecessor, consisting of certain direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Transportation Technologies Industries, Inc., or TTII, which purchased our business in 1991. On June 4, 1999, we were acquired from TTII by an investor group led by certain members of management of TTII who became our management. The financial data of our predecessor does not reflect any adjustments associated with our acquisition from TTII in 1999, and our consolidated financial data after our acquisition in 1999 is not directly comparable to our predecessor’s financial data.

We have included our selected consolidated financial data for the periods from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999 and from June 4, 1999 to December 31, 1999 in this prospectus because we believe that this additional financial data is useful in illustrating the cyclical nature of our business, which is discussed elsewhere in this prospectus.

Selected consolidated financial data


	Predecessor			FreightCar America, Inc.
	Period from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999			Period from June 4, 1999 to December 31, 1999			Year ended December 31,															Six months ended June 30,
							2000			2001			2002			2003			2004			2004			2005
	(in thousands)
Statements of operations data:
Sales	$	316,931		$	367,742		$	397,577		$	210,314		$	225,497		$	244,349		$	482,180		$	183,813		$	396,519
Cost of sales⁽¹⁾		271,714			325,640			358,267			187,646			212,589			225,216			468,309			181,294			358,976

Gross profit⁽²⁾		45,217			42,102			39,310			22,668			12,908			19,133			13,871			2,519			37,543
Selling, general and administrative expense⁽³⁾		8,215			11,397			18,580			13,370			12,778			14,318			14,601			6,993			13,740
Compensation expense under stock option agreements (selling, general and administrative expense)⁽⁴⁾		—			—			—			—			—			—			8,900			—			69
Provision for settlement of labor disputes⁽⁵⁾		—			—			—			—			—			—			9,159			—			370
Goodwill amortization expense		—			1,074			1,812			1,744			—			—			—			—			—

Operating income (loss)⁽⁶⁾		37,002			29,631			18,918			7,554			130			4,815			(18,789	)		(4,474	)		23,364
Interest income		(663	)		(354	)		(1,391	)		(887	)		(162	)		(128	)		(282	)		(52	)		(342	)
Related-party interest expense		—			2,535			5,165			5,723			6,517			6,764			7,029			3,397			3,253
Third-party interest expense		451			3,623			3,999			2,398			1,595			1,367			1,111			531			964
Interest expense and related accretion on rights to additional acquisition consideration		—			1,192			2,341			2,927			3,659			4,573			5,716			2,598			6,382
Write-off of deferred financing costs		—			—			—			—			—			348			—			—			439
Loss on disposal of railcar lease fleet		—			689			187			—			—			—			—			—			—
Amortization of deferred financing costs		—			410			702			702			702			629			459			270			184

Income (loss) before income taxes		37,214			21,536			7,915			(3,309	)		(12,181	)		(8,738	)		(32,822	)		(11,218	)		12,484
Income tax provision (benefit)		14,398			9,236			6,089			167			(3,554	)		(1,318	)		(7,962	)		(3,197	)		1,425

Net income (loss)		22,816			12,300			1,826			(3,476	)		(8,627	)		(7,420	)		(24,860	)		(8,021	)		11,059
Redeemable preferred stock dividends accumulated, but undeclared		—			620			1,062			1,063			1,062			1,063			1,062			532			311

Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders	$	22,816		$	11,680		$	764		$	(4,539	)	$	(9,689	)	$	(8,483	)	$	(25,922	)	$	(8,553	)	$	10,748

Selected consolidated financial data


	Predecessor	FreightCar America, Inc.
	Period from January 1, 1999 to June 3, 1999	Period from June 4, 1999 to December 31, 1999		Year ended December 31,														Six months ended June 30,
				2000		2001			2002			2003			2004			2004			2005
	(in thousands, except share and per share data)
Weighted average common shares outstanding— basic⁽⁷⁾			6,875,000		6,875,000		6,875,000			6,875,000			6,875,000			6,888,750			6,875,000			9,715,020
Weighted average common shares outstanding—diluted⁽⁷⁾			6,875,000		6,875,000		6,875,000			6,875,000			6,875,000			6,888,750			6,875,000			9,723,306
Per share data:
Net income (loss) per share attributable to common shareholders (basic and diluted)⁽⁷⁾		$	1.70	$	0.11	$	(0.66	)	$	(1.41	)	$	(1.23	)	$	(3.76	)	$	(1.24	)	$	1.11

Balance sheet data (at period end):
Cash and cash equivalents		$	7,840	$	30,487	$	25,033		$	19,725		$	20,008		$	11,213					$	20,467
Restricted cash⁽⁸⁾			82		3,882		4,061			4,116			11,698			12,955						—
Total assets			186,701		166,972		148,702			141,531			140,052			191,143						186,517
Total debt⁽⁹⁾			65,479		62,476		55,423			53,424			51,778			56,058						36
Rights to additional acquisition consideration, including accumulated accretion⁽¹⁰⁾			9,365		11,707		14,634			18,292			22,865			28,581						—
Total redeemable preferred stock			6,870		7,932		8,995			10,057			11,120			12,182						—
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)			6,935		7,699		3,160			(9,542	)		(19,710	)		(37,089	)					58,530

(1)

Cost of sales for the year ended December 31, 2004 includes an estimated $12.7 million in increased cost of raw materials (excluding an estimated $1.8 million in increased cost of raw materials under the customer contract for box railcars described in note (2)), consisting primarily of aluminum and steel, which we were unable to pass on to our customers under our fixed-price customer contracts. As a result of the increased costs, we renegotiated our contracts with a majority of our customers to increase the purchase prices of our railcars to reflect the increased cost of raw materials, and as a result, we were able to pass on to our customers approximately 40% of the increased raw material costs with respect to the railcars that we produced and delivered in 2004. In addition, we have entered into contracts with a majority of our customers that allow for variable pricing to protect us against future increases in the cost of raw materials. We had four remaining fixed-price contracts reflecting a backlog of 528 railcars out of a total backlog of 11,397 railcars as of December 31, 2004. As of June 30, 2005, we had one remaining fixed-price contract reflecting a backlog of 66 railcars out of a total backlog of 15,867 railcars as of June 30, 2005. We expect to deliver all of the railcars under the remaining fixed-price contract by September 30, 2005. Other than the remaining fixed-price contract, we have entered into contracts with all of our customers that allow for variable pricing to protect us against future changes in the cost of raw materials. Cost of sales for the six months ended June 30, 2005 included an estimated $0.9 million in increased cost of raw materials (excluding an estimated $1.5 million in increased cost of raw materials under the customer contract for box railcars described in note (2)), consisting primarily of aluminum and steel, which we were unable to pass on to our customers under our fixed-price customer contracts.

(2)

Our gross profit for the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2005, includes losses of $8.9 million, $6.5 million and $1.5 million, respectively, on a customer contract for box railcars, a type of railcar that we had not manufactured in the past, which reflect increased raw material, labor and other costs that exceeded the fixed purchase price under this contract. As of June 30, 2005, we had delivered all of the box railcars under this contract and we do not plan to produce any box railcars in the future.

(3)

Our selling, general and administrative expense for the year ended December 31, 2003 includes a finder’s fee of $1.8 million that we paid to a third party for securing a major railcar purchase order for us in early 2003. Our in-house sales personnel generally procure orders, and we do not ordinarily pay finder’s fees to obtain purchase orders.

(4)

Selected consolidated financial data

Series A voting preferred stock. We have recorded a non-cash expense of $8.9 million based on the estimated value per Unit as of December 23, 2004. All of these options were exercised prior to April 11, 2005 pursuant to which we issued 557,700 shares of our common stock and 1,014 shares of our Series A voting preferred stock. Following the completion of our initial public offering, we adopted the 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan, or the Incentive Plan, and issued to certain executive officers options to purchase a total of 329,808 shares of our common stock. We recorded a non-cash charge of $69,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2005 in connection with the issuance of the stock options. See “Management—Executive compensation—Option awards and option plan.”

(5)

On November 15, 2004, we entered into the Johnstown settlement and recorded a $9.2 million charge with respect to the year ended December 31, 2004. As part of the Johnstown settlement, we agreed to pay back wages equal to $1.4 million to the covered employees and recorded a $0.8 million cash charge for expenses related to the Johnstown settlement in the year ended December 31, 2004. We also recorded $7.0 million of non-cash expense in the year ended December 31, 2004 related to pension and postretirement termination benefits accrued with respect to retired unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, we recorded a charge of $370,000 (in selling, general and administrative expense) in connection with the Johnstown settlement. See “Business—Legal proceedings—Labor dispute settlement.”

(6)

Our operating income for the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, includes curtailment gains of $1.2 million and $3.1 million, respectively, related to our postretirement benefit program resulting from our layoff of a significant number of unionized employees at our Johnstown facility.

(7)

Share and per share data have been restated to give effect to the merger.

(8)

Our restricted cash for the year ended December 31, 2000 and the fiscal years thereafter includes cash collateral of $3.8 million plus interest held in escrow for our participation in a residual support guarantee agreement with respect to railcars that we sold to a customer that are presently leased by the customer to a third party. Our restricted cash for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 also includes $7.5 million held in a restricted cash account as additional collateral for our former revolving credit facility, which was released to us after we entered into our revolving credit facility, and $1.2 million in escrow, representing security for workers’ compensation insurance. As of June 30, 2005, we no longer had any remaining restricted cash. Restricted cash in the amount of $13.0 million was released during the six months ended June 30, 2005 as follows: the $7.5 million attributable to cash held as additional collateral under the former revolving credit facility was released upon signing the new credit facility agreement; $1.2 million held in escrow as security for worker’s compensation insurance was replaced by a letter of credit; and $4.3 million held in escrow for a residual support guaranty relating to railcars we sold to a financial institution that are leased by a third-party customer was released by the financial institution.

(9)

Our total debt includes current maturities of long-term debt and our variable rate demand industrial revenue bonds due 2010 which are classified as short-term debt. We repaid all of our debt that existed prior to the initial public offering with the net proceeds of the initial public offering and available cash.

(10)

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

You should read the following discussion in conjunction with “Selected consolidated financial data” and our consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that are based on management’s current expectations, estimates and projections about our business and operations. Our actual results may differ materially from those currently anticipated and expressed in such forward-looking statements and as a result of the factors we describe under “Risk factors” and elsewhere in this prospectus. See “Special note regarding forward-looking statements” and “Risk factors.”

OVERVIEW

We are the leading manufacturer of aluminum-bodied railcars in North America, based on the number of railcars delivered. We specialize in the production of coal-carrying railcars, which represented 78% of our deliveries of railcars in 2004 and 91% of our deliveries of railcars in the six months ended June 30, 2005, while the balance of our production consisted of a broad spectrum of railcar types, including aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars. We also refurbish and rebuild railcars and sell forged, cast and fabricated parts for all of the railcars that we produce, as well as those manufactured by others. We have chosen not to offer significant railcar leasing services, as we have made a strategic decision not to compete with our customers that provide railcar leasing services, which represent a significant portion of our revenue.

Our manufacturing facilities are located in Danville, Illinois, Johnstown, Pennsylvania and Roanoke, Virginia. Our Danville facility produced approximately 81% of our railcars manufactured during the year ended December 31, 2004 and 61% of our railcars manufactured during the six months ended June 30, 2005, and manufactured 100% and 68% of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars during the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. We believe that the operational efficiency of our Danville facility has increased over the last six years resulting in a significant reduction in our manufacturing costs. Our Johnstown facility manufactures small covered hopper railcars, coiled steel railcars, aluminum vehicle carrier railcars and aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. In April 2005, we commenced operations at a manufacturing facility that we have leased in Roanoke, Virginia. Our new Roanoke facility has the capability to manufacture a variety of types of railcars, including aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars. See “—Recent developments.”

Our primary customers are financial institutions, railroads and shippers. The percentages of our total sales attributable to each type of customer are summarized in the table below for the periods presented.


	Year ended December 31,						Six months ended June 30, 2005
	2002		2003		2004		Six months ended June 30, 2005
Financial institutions	18	%	30	%	38	%	28	%
Railroads	11	%	13	%	31	%	20	%
Shippers	71	%	57	%	31	%	52	%

	100	%	100	%	100	%	100	%

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

We have established long-term relationships with a customer base that includes some of the largest financial institutions, railroads and shippers in North America. Most of our individual customers do not make purchases every year, since they do not need to replace or replenish their railcar fleets on a yearly basis. Many of our customers place orders for products on an as-needed basis, sometimes only once every few years. As a result, our sales and income from operations vary substantially from quarter to quarter, and the percentages of total sales represented by a type of customer in any period, as shown above, may not reflect sales to that type of customer in future periods. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—The variable purchase patterns of our customers and the timing of completion, delivery and acceptance of customer orders may cause our sales and income from operations to vary substantially each quarter, which will result in significant fluctuations in our quarterly results.”

In 2004, we delivered 7,484 new railcars, including 5,840 aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. In the six months ended June 30, 2005, we delivered 5,704 new railcars, including 5,103 aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. Our total backlog of firm orders for new railcars increased from 11,397 railcars as of December 31, 2004 to 15,867 railcars as of June 30, 2005, representing estimated sales of $747.8 million and $1.1 billion, respectively, attributable to such backlog. Approximately 98% of our backlog as of June 30, 2005 consisted of coal-carrying railcars.

The prices for steel and aluminum, the primary raw material components of our railcars, increased sharply in 2004 as a result of strong demand, limited availability of production inputs for steel and aluminum, including scrap metal, industry consolidation and import trade barriers. The costs of raw steel and aluminum have increased by approximately 155% and 21%, respectively, during the period from October 2003 through June 30, 2005. As a result, during the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, we were unable to pass on an estimated $12.7 million and $0.9 million, respectively, in increased raw material costs to our customers under existing fixed-price customer contracts. Over the course of 2004, we renegotiated our contracts with a majority of our customers to increase the purchase prices of our railcars to reflect the increased cost of raw materials. As a result, we were able to pass on to our customers approximately 40% of the increased raw material costs with respect to the railcars that we produced and delivered in 2004. In addition, we have entered into customer contracts that allow for variable pricing to protect us against future changes in the cost of raw materials so that, as of June 30, 2005, all but one of our customer contracts allowed for such variable pricing. The remaining fixed-price contract reflects a backlog of 66 railcars out of a total backlog of 15,867 railcars as of June 30, 2005. We expect to deliver all of the railcars under the remaining fixed-price contract by September 30, 2005.

With respect to the supply of components, the railcar industry continues to be adversely impacted by shortages of castings and wheels as a result of reorganization and consolidation of domestic suppliers, increased demand for new railcars and railroad maintenance requirements. Currently, we believe that these shortages will not significantly impact our ability to meet our delivery requirements as supply of these components will be sourced worldwide.

Over the past several years, we have reduced our fixed costs, and we expect to benefit from fixed cost leverage as our sales increase. In particular, we believe that the operational efficiency of our Danville facility has increased over the last six years resulting in a significant reduction in our manufacturing costs. We also believe that our Roanoke facility is producing railcars at a competitive cost and efficiency. We also benefit from our relatively stable selling, general and administrative expenses, which increase at a slower rate relative to growth in railcar production. Additionally, we expect that the Johnstown settlement will allow our Johnstown facility to become more cost-competitive. The settlement, among other things, limits our future liabilities for health care coverage and pension benefits for our retired unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. See “Business—Legal proceedings—Labor dispute settlement.”

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

A key component of our business strategy is to maintain our leading position in the coal-carrying railcar segment, while also developing additional opportunities for new product lines and growth. We expect to expand our aluminum-bodied railcar product line to include railcars that carry materials other than coal, such as our aluminum vehicle carrier railcars. We are also exploring opportunities to increase our marketing activities abroad. We will continue to explore international opportunities and, from time to time, may enter into licensing arrangements or joint ventures with established railcar manufacturers outside of the United States. We presently have no plans to invest in facilities outside the United States.

The North American railcar market is highly cyclical and the trends in the railcar industry are closely related to the overall level of economic activity. In an improving economy, railroads and utilities should continue to upgrade their fleets of aging steel-bodied coal-carrying railcars to lighter aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. North American industry railcar orders were 47,249, 70,626 and 36,695 for 2003, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. North American industry backlog at December 31, 2004 was 58,677 railcars and at June 30, 2005 was 60,544 railcars. We believe that the near-term outlook for railcar demand is positive due to the current U.S. economic recovery which we believe is resulting in increased rail traffic, the replacement of aging railcar fleets, an improved outlook for U.S. steel manufacturers and an increasing demand for electricity.

We believe that the near-term outlook for our business is positive, based on the increased demand for railcars, our current backlog, our product portfolio and our operational efficiency in manufacturing railcars. We believe that the demand for our coal-carrying railcars will remain strong, as an improving economy typically leads to increased demand for electricity. Additionally, our cost structure has been strengthened by our change to variable customer contracts that protect us against future changes in the cost of raw materials and by the recent settlement agreement that limits our future liabilities for health care coverage and pension benefits for retired employees at our Johnstown facility. See “—Recent developments” below. In response to the current demand for our railcars, we are considering the addition of another manufacturing facility and exploring other opportunities to increase our production capacity. See “—Recent developments” below regarding our new production facility in Roanoke, Virginia. However, U.S. economic conditions may not continue to improve in the future or result in a sustained economic recovery, and our business is subject to significant other risks that may cause our current positive outlook to change. See “Risk factors.”

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

In April 2005, we completed an initial public offering of shares of our common stock. In connection with the offering, we offered and sold 5,100,000 shares of our common stock and certain selling stockholders offered and sold 4,675,000 shares at a price of $19.00 per share. The net proceeds that we received from the initial public offering, after deducting underwriting discounts, commissions and estimated offering-related expenses payable by us, were approximately $85.3 million. We used all of our net proceeds and our available cash to repay our existing indebtedness, redeem all of our outstanding redeemable preferred stock, pay amounts due to shareholders, pay amounts due in connection with the termination of certain management services and other agreements with certain of our stockholders and pay related fees and expenses. See “Liquidity and capital resources.”

In December 2004, we entered into an agreement to lease a railcar manufacturing facility from Norfolk Southern Railway Company, or Norfolk Southern, in Roanoke, Virginia. The lease agreement provides for the lease of approximately 11.6 acres, including certain buildings, equipment, machinery and tracks on the property, and has a term of ten years, commencing on December 31, 2004. The lease agreement provides that we or Norfolk Southern may terminate this agreement for any reason following the fifth

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

anniversary of the lease agreement. We are initially producing aluminum-bodied railcars and plan to eventually produce both aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars at the Roanoke facility. We delivered our first railcar manufactured at the Roanoke facility in the second quarter of 2005. We entered into a supply agreement with Norfolk Southern, pursuant to which Norfolk Southern may, but is not required to, purchase railcars from us. This supply agreement sets forth the terms and conditions under which Norfolk Southern may purchase railcars from us, and the term of this agreement is concurrent with the term of the lease agreement.

On November 15, 2004, JAC, our subsidiary, entered into a settlement agreement with the USWA, which represents our unionized employees in our Johnstown, Pennsylvania manufacturing facility. Our unionized employees at our Johnstown facility, who comprise approximately 38% of our total workforce as of June 30, 2005, were without a collective bargaining agreement since October 2001. The settlement agreement sets forth the terms of a new 42-month collective bargaining agreement with our unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. The settlement agreement also provides for the resolution of charges made by the USWA against us with the NLRB, the Deemer and Britt lawsuits and certain workplace grievance matters. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the plaintiffs in the Deemer and Britt lawsuits agreed to withdraw their lawsuits with prejudice and the USWA agreed to request that the NLRB prosecutor withdraw the NLRB charges against us. In addition, the settlement agreement limits our future liabilities for health care coverage and pension benefits for retired unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. The settlement was conditioned on, among other things, obtaining certain third-party approvals. All of the conditions to the effectiveness of the settlement were met as of May 4, 2005. We refer to the settlement agreement and the related matters discussed above as the Johnstown settlement. See “Business—Legal proceedings—Labor dispute settlement.”

FINANCIAL STATEMENT PRESENTATION

Restatements

Subsequent to the issuance of our 2004 financial statements, our management determined that $5.2 million of our variable demand industrial revenue bonds due 2010 previously reported as long-term debt at December 31, 2003 and 2004 should have been reported within current liabilities. Accordingly, previously reported long-term debt at each of December 31, 2003 and 2004 was reduced by $5.2 million and current liabilities and total current liabilities at those dates were increased by $5.2 million from the amounts previously reported.

In addition, subsequent to the issuance of our 2004 financial statements, our management determined that changes in restricted cash deposits previously reported in the statements of cash flows as operating activities should have been reported in the statements of cash flows as investing activities. Accordingly, the statements of cash flows for 2002, 2003 and 2004, the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2005, and the six months ended June 30, 2004 have been restated from the amounts previously reported. This restatement had no effect on our overall net cash and cash equivalent position previously reported for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, the three months ended March 31, 2004 and 2005, and the six months ended June 30, 2004. The restatement of our cash flow information did not result in any change to any financial information included in our consolidated statements of operations, balance sheets or statements of stockholders’ equity (deficit) for such periods.

All financial information in this prospectus gives effect to these restatements. See Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements for more information.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Sales

Our sales are generated primarily from sales of the railcars that we manufacture. Our sales depend on industry demand for new railcars, which is driven by overall economic conditions and the demand for railcar transportation of various products, such as coal, motor vehicles, flat and coiled steel products, lumber, plywood and other building products, minerals, cement, grain, automotive parts and paper products. Our sales are also affected by competitive market pressures that impact the prices for our railcars and by the types of railcars sold.

We generally manufacture railcars under firm orders from our customers. We recognize sales, which we sometimes refer to as deliveries, on new and rebuilt railcars when we complete the individual railcars, the railcars are accepted by the customer following inspection, the risk for any damage or other loss with respect to the railcars passes to the customer and title to the railcars transfers to the customer. With respect to sales transactions involving the trading-in of used railcars, in accordance with accounting rules, we recognize sales for the entire transaction when the cash consideration received is in excess of 25% of the total transaction value and on a pro rata portion of the total transaction value when the cash consideration received is less than 25% of the total transaction value. Sales of used railcars that had been traded in were $5.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, and represented only 2.6% of our total sales of railcars for that year. Sales of used railcars for the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005 were not material. We value used railcars received at their estimated fair market value less a normal profit margin. The variable purchase patterns of our customers and the timing of completion, delivery and acceptance of customer orders may cause our sales and income from operations to vary substantially each quarter, which will result in significant fluctuations in our quarterly results.

Cost of sales

Our cost of sales includes the cost of raw materials such as aluminum and steel, as well as the cost of finished railcar components, such as castings, wheels, truck components and couplers, and other specialty components. Our cost of sales also includes labor, utilities, freight, manufacturing depreciation and other manufacturing costs. Factors that have affected our cost of sales include the recent increases in the cost of steel and aluminum, the limited supply of castings and our efforts to lower manufacturing costs in our Johnstown, Pennsylvania facility and to reduce the costs of new products that we have recently introduced.

We purchase, and we believe most of our competitors purchase, a substantial percentage of railcar castings and wheels from subsidiaries of Amsted Industries Inc. Due to manufacturing limitations at Amsted Industries, we have only been supplied with a limited number of castings, which has constrained our production of railcars. We believe that the supply to our competitors has similarly been limited. For the year ended December 31, 2004, due to a shortage of heavy castings, our deliveries were limited to 7,484 railcars, even though we had orders and production capacity to manufacture more railcars. The limited supply of castings did not impact our deliveries for the six months ended June 30, 2005. Customer orders may be subject to cancellation, customer requests for delays in railcar deliveries, inspection rights and other customary industry terms and conditions. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—Limitations on the supply of heavy castings, wheels and other railcar components could adversely affect our business because they may limit the number of railcars we can manufacture.”

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

scrap metal to China, and as a result, steel producers have charged scrap metal surcharges in excess of agreed-upon prices. In addition, the price and availability of other railcar components that are made of steel have been adversely affected by the increased cost and limited availability of steel. These changes negatively impacted our railcar margins for the year ended December 31, 2004. In the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, we were unable to pass on an estimated $12.7 million and $0.9 million, respectively, in increased raw material costs to our customers under the existing fixed-price customer contracts.

In response to the increasing cost of raw materials, we are working with suppliers to minimize surcharges that they charge us and, where possible, we have sought to pass on higher material costs to customers. We have renegotiated our contracts with a majority of our customers to increase the purchase prices of our railcars to reflect the increased cost of raw materials, and as a result, we were able to pass on to our customers approximately 40% of the increased raw material costs with respect to the railcars that we produced and delivered in 2004. In addition, we have entered into customer contracts that allow for variable pricing to protect us against future changes in the cost of raw materials so that, as of June 30, 2005, all but one of our customer contracts allowed for such variable pricing. We expect that most of the contracts that we enter into in the future will provide for variable pricing on certain raw materials. However, we may not always be effective in passing on these cost increases to our customers. For example, in the year ended December 31, 2004, we recorded $2.2 million of excess costs that we were unable to pass on to our customers relating to a purchase order which was completed and delivered in the second quarter of 2004, an $8.9 million loss on a box railcar contract, a $2.8 million loss on an aluminum vehicle carrier railcar contract and a $0.3 million loss on a container railcar contract. Approximately $1.8 million of the $8.9 million loss on the box railcar contract occurred as a result of the increased raw material costs exceeding the fixed purchase price under this contract. In the six months ended June 30, 2005, we recorded an additional $1.5 million loss on the same box railcar contract as a result of the increased raw material costs exceeding the fixed purchase price under this contract. Increases in prices, surcharges or limited availability of raw materials may adversely impact our margins and production schedules in future periods. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—The current high cost of the raw materials that we use to manufacture railcars, especially aluminum and steel, and delivery delays associated with these raw materials may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.”

Operating income

Operating income represents total sales less cost of sales, selling, general and administrative expenses, goodwill and intangible asset amortization expense and the provision for the settlement of labor disputes in 2004.

BACKLOG

We define backlog as the number and value of railcars that our customers have committed in writing to purchase from us, which have not been recognized as sales. Our contracts generally include cancellation clauses under which customers are required, upon cancellation of the contract, to reimburse us for costs incurred in reliance on an order and to compensate us for lost profits.

Our backlog has increased from 1,067 railcars at the end of 2002 to 15,867 railcars as of June 30, 2005, which we believe is primarily due to the current economic recovery, which is resulting in the replacement of aging railcar fleets, and the increasing demand for electricity and the increasing demand for steel, thereby increasing the demand for coal-carrying railcars and industrial and steel-carrying railcars, respectively.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

The following table depicts our reported railcar backlog, in number of railcars and estimated future sales value attributable to such backlog, for the periods shown.


	Year ended December 31,									Six months ended June 30,
	2002			2003			2004			2004			2005
Railcar backlog at start of period		2,178			1,067			6,444			6,444			11,397
New railcars delivered		(3,942	)		(4,550	)		(7,484	)		(3,128	)		(5,704	)
New railcar orders		2,831			9,927			12,437			5,103			10,174

Railcar backlog at end of period		1,067			6,444			11,397			8,419			15,867

Estimated backlog at end of period (in thousands)(1)	$	55,887		$	365,876		$	747,842		$	540,127		$	1,062,977

(1)

We expect that substantially all of our reported backlog as of June 30, 2005 will be converted to sales by the first quarter of 2007. However, there can be no assurance that our reported backlog will convert to sales in any particular period, if at all, or that the actual sales from these contracts will equal our reported backlog estimates. Customer orders may be subject to cancellation, customer requests for delays in railcar deliveries, inspection rights and other customary industry terms and conditions. See “Risk factors—Risks related to our business—The level of our reported backlog may not necessarily indicate what our future sales will be, and our actual sales may fall short of the estimated sales value attributed to our backlog.”

In addition, due to the large size of railcar orders and variations in the mix of railcars, the size of our reported backlog at the end of any given period may fluctuate significantly. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—The variable purchase patterns of our customers and the timing of completion, delivery and acceptance of customer orders may cause our sales and income from operations to vary substantially each quarter, which will result in significant fluctuations in our quarterly results.” We rely upon third-party suppliers for heavy castings, wheels and other components for our railcars. In the event that our suppliers were to stop or reduce their supply of heavy castings, wheels or the other railcar components that we use, our business would be disrupted, and the actual sales from our customer contracts may fall significantly short of our reported backlog. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—Limitations on the supply of heavy castings, wheels and other railcar components could adversely affect our business because they may limit the number of railcars we can manufacture.” We currently do not have any backlog for rebuilt railcars.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following table summarizes our historical operations as a percentage of revenues for the periods shown. Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of operating results that may be expected in the future.


	Year ended December 31,															Six months ended June 30,
	2002					2003					2004					2004					2005
Sales	$	225,497		100	%	$	244,349		100	%	$	482,180		100	%	$	183,813		100	%	$	396,519		100	%
Cost of sales		212,589		94	%		225,216		92	%		468,309		97	%		181,294		99	%		358,976		91	%

Gross profit		12,908		6	%		19,133		8	%		13,871		3	%		2,519		1	%		37,543		9	%
Selling, general and administrative expense		12,778		6	%		14,318		6	%		14,601		3	%		6,993		4	%		13,740		3	%
Provision for settlement of labor disputes		—		—			—		—			9,159		2	%		—		—			370		0	%
Compensation expense under stock option agreements (selling, general and administrative expense)		—		—			—		—			8,900		2	%		—		—			69		0	%

Operating income (loss)		130		0	%		4,815		2	%		(18,789	)	(4	)%		(4,474	)	(3	)%		23,364		6	%
Interest income		(162	)	(0	)%		(128	)	(0	)%		(282	)	(0	)%		(52	)	(0	)%		(342	)	(0	)%
Related-party interest expense		6,517		3	%		6,764		3	%		7,029		2	%		3,397		2	%		3,253		1	%
Third-party interest expense		1,595		1	%		1,367		1	%		1,111		0	%		531		0	%		964		0	%
Interest expense and related accretion on rights to additional acquisition consideration		3,659		1	%		4,573		2	%		5,716		1	%		2,598		1	%		6,382		2	%
Write-off of deferred financing costs		—		—			348		0	%		—		—			—		—			439		0	%
Amortization of deferred financing costs		702		0	%		629		0	%		459		0	%		270		0	%		184		0	%

Income (loss) before income taxes		(12,181	)	(5	)%		(8,738	)	(4	)%		(32,822	)	(7	)%		(11,218	)	(6	)%		12,484		3	%
Income tax provision (benefit)		(3,554	)	(2	)%		(1,318	)	(1	)%		(7,962	)	(2	)%		(3,197	)	(2	)%		1,425		0	%

Net income (loss)	$	(8,627	)	(3	)%	$	(7,420	)	(3	)%	$	(24,860	)	(5	)%	$	(8,021	)	(4	)%	$	11,059		3	%

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Comparison of the six months ended June 30, 2005 to the six months ended June 30, 2004

Our net income was $11.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, reflecting an increase of $19.1 million from the net loss of $8.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. The improvement in financial results was primarily attributable to increased sales from our delivery of an additional 2,576 railcars in the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared to the same period in 2004. Other factors include improved market pricing environment, operating leverage attributed to higher volume and the impact of the pass-through of increases in raw material costs to our customers with respect to a majority of our railcar deliveries in the six months ended June 30, 2005. Net income attributable to common stockholders increased to $10.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005 as compared to a net loss of $8.6 million attributable to common stockholders for the same period in 2004. For the six months ended June 30, 2005 our basic and diluted net income per share was $1.11 on basic and diluted shares outstanding of 9,715,020 and 9,723,306, respectively. For the same period of the prior year, our basic and diluted net loss per share was $1.24 on basic and diluted shares outstanding of 6,875,000.

Sales

Our sales for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $396.5 million as compared to $183.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004, representing an increase of $212.7 million. This increase was primarily due to our delivery of an additional 2,576 railcars, an 82% increase, and an improved market pricing environment in the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared to the same period in 2004. The increased volume of railcar deliveries reflects increased demand for our coal-carrying railcars. Deliveries of our BethGon II and AutoFlood III coal-carrying railcars comprised 81% of our total railcar deliveries for the six months ended June 30, 2005.

Gross profit

Gross profit for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was $37.5 million as compared to $2.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004, representing an increase of $35.0 million. This increase was primarily due to our increased sales volume, an improved market pricing environment, operating leverage attributed to higher volume and the impact of the pass-through of increases in raw material costs to our customers with respect to a majority of our railcar deliveries. During the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, our gross profit was adversely impacted by higher manufacturing costs of approximately $1.5 million and $6.5 million, respectively, associated with increased material, labor and other costs related to a contract to manufacture box railcars, a type of railcar that we had not previously manufactured. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, we were able to pass on increases in raw material costs to our customers with respect to 92% of our railcar deliveries.

Selling, general and administrative expenses

Selling, general and administrative expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $14.2 million as compared to $7.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004, representing an increase of $7.2 million. Selling, general and administrative expenses were 3.6% of our sales for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 3.8% of our sales for the six months ended June 30, 2004. The increase in selling, general and administrative expenses is primarily attributable to increased expenses of $1.6 million relating to our employee incentive program, charges related to the termination of management services and other agreements of $0.9 million, an additional charge of $0.4 million relating to a change in estimate of the charge resulting from the Johnstown labor settlement, and $0.4 million of expenses attributable to the implementation of controls and procedures applicable to public companies. In addition, selling, general and administrative expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2005 include $0.5 million of costs relating to operations at our Roanoke, Virginia facility.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Interest expense

Our interest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was $10.6 million as compared to $6.5 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004, representing an increase of $4.1 million. The increase in interest expense is primarily attributable to the accretion of additional interest on the rights to additional acquisition consideration prior to the payment of the additional acquisition consideration with the net proceeds of the initial public offering. Interest expense and related accretion on the rights to additional acquisition consideration, including the one-time final payment resulting from the initial public offering, totaled $6.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, while the interest expense on the rights to additional acquisition consideration for the six months ended June 30, 2004 was $2.6 million. Related-party interest expense and third-party interest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $3.3 million and $1.0 million, respectively, compared with $3.4 million and $0.5 million for the same period in 2004.

Income taxes

The provision for income taxes was $1.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005, as compared to an income tax benefit of $3.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. The effective tax rates for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and 2004 were 11.4% and 28.5%, respectively. The effective tax rate for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was lower than the statutory U.S. federal income tax rate of 35% due to the addition of a 2.0% blended state rate, less a 24.1% effect for previously non-deductible interest expense on the rights to additional acquisition consideration which became deductible for income tax purposes upon payment of the additional acquisition consideration and a 1.5% effect for other permanent differences. The effective tax rate for the six months ended June 30, 2004 was lower than the statutory U.S. federal income tax rate of 35% due to the addition of a 3.0% blended state rate, less an 8.1% effect for then-nondeductible interest expense on the rights to additional acquisition consideration and a 1.4% effect for other permanent differences.

Comparison of the year ended December 31, 2004 to the year ended December 31, 2003

Our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $24.9 million as compared to $7.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, representing an increase of $17.5 million. The increase in our net loss was attributable to a $9.2 million expense recorded for the Johnstown settlement, an $8.9 million loss on a box railcar contract reflecting increased raw material, labor and other costs, a $2.8 million loss on an aluminum vehicle carrier railcar contract, a $0.3 million loss on a container railcar contract and the recording of $8.9 million of compensation expense to account for the 2004 Options. These decreases were partially offset by increased sales from our delivery of an additional 2,929 railcars in the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same period in 2003. Net loss attributable to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $25.9 million as compared to $8.5 million for the same period in 2003. The difference of $1.0 million between net loss and net loss attributable to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2004 reflects accumulated dividends on our redeemable preferred stock.

Sales

Our sales for the year ended December 31, 2004 were $482.2 million as compared to $244.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, representing an increase of $237.9 million. This increase was primarily due to our delivery of an additional 2,929 railcars in the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same period in 2003, which resulted in an increase in sales of $237.9 million. The additional deliveries of railcars in the year ended December 31, 2004 reflect an increased demand for

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

coal-carrying railcars. Additionally, our sales in 2004 increased by $3.7 million from sales of rebuilt railcars, sales of parts and other sales when compared to the same period in 2003. These increases were offset by reduced sales of $5.7 million from rebuilding railcars in the year ended December 31, 2004 when compared to the same period in 2003.

Gross profit

Our gross profit in the year ended December 31, 2004 was $13.9 million as compared to $19.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2003, representing a decrease of $5.2 million, or 27.2%, in gross profit. This decrease was primarily due to an estimated $12.7 million increase in the cost of raw materials (consisting primarily of aluminum and steel) and $14.3 million of excess costs on customer contracts that we were unable to pass on to our customers. The $14.3 million loss included an $8.9 million loss related to a contract to manufacture box railcars, a product line that we had not previously manufactured. The $8.9 million loss on the box railcar contract reflects increased raw material, labor and other costs that exceeded the fixed purchase price under this contract. After completing deliveries of box railcars under this customer contract, we plan to cease manufacturing this product. The $14.3 million loss also included a $2.8 million loss on an aluminum vehicle carrier railcar contract reflecting increased raw material, labor and other costs that exceeded the fixed purchase price under this contract. The $14.3 million loss also included a $2.3 million loss on a purchase order for another type of railcar that was completed and delivered in the second quarter of 2004 and a $0.3 million loss on container railcars manufactured for foreign delivery reflecting increased raw material, labor and other costs that exceeded the fixed purchase price under this contract. These decreases were offset by $20.8 million of additional gross profit resulting from the sale of an additional 2,929 railcars and $1.0 million of gross profit from rebuilding railcars, managing leased railcars, sales of parts and the resale of used railcars in the year ended December 31, 2004. Our gross profit margin decreased to 2.8% in the year ended December 31, 2004 from 7.8% in the year ended December 31, 2003.

Selling, general and administrative expenses

Our selling, general and administrative expenses in the year ended December 31, 2004 were $14.6 million as compared to $14.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2003, representing an increase of $0.3 million, or 2.1%, in these expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses were 3.0% of sales in the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to 5.9% of sales in the year ended December 31, 2003. Selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of total sales declined in 2004 as compared to 2003, despite a 97.3% increase in sales for the period, because these costs do not increase in direct proportion to increases in sales.

Stock compensation expense

We recorded $8.9 million of stock compensation expense (selling, general and administrative expense) in December 2004 related to the grant of the 2004 Options to certain of our directors and officers. Our board of directors approved the grant of certain options to purchase an aggregate of 1,014 Units at an exercise price of $0.01 per Unit. Each Unit consisted of 550 shares of our common stock and one share of our Series A voting preferred stock. The compensation expense was determined based upon the estimated value per Unit as of the effective date of grant of the 2004 Options on December 23, 2004. See “Management—Executive compensation—Option awards and option plan.”

Provision for settlement of labor disputes

As part of the Johnstown settlement, we agreed to add certain retirees to our pension and postretirement benefit programs and pay fixed health care costs with respect to the unionized retired employees of JAC.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

We also agreed to pay back wages equal to $1.4 million to the covered employees and recorded a $0.8 million cash charge for expenses related to the settlement. We also recorded $7.0 million of non-cash expense related to termination benefits accrued by the participants of the pension and postretirement benefit programs through the date of the settlement agreement. The settlement was conditioned on, among other things, approval by the NLRB and the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania of the settlement and the withdrawal of certain NLRB charges and class-action lawsuits against us related to the Johnstown facility. All of the conditions to the effectiveness of the settlement were met as of May 4, 2005.

Interest expense

Our interest expense in the year ended December 31, 2004 was $13.9 million as compared to $12.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, representing an increase of $1.2 million, or 9.1%. The recorded amount of our obligation under the rights to additional acquisition consideration accretes at the rate of 25% per year. The interest on the rights to additional acquisition consideration increased our interest expense in the year ended December 31, 2004 by $1.1 million when compared to the year ended December 31, 2003. For more information on the rights to additional acquisition consideration, see “Certain relationships and related party transactions—Rights to additional acquisition consideration.” This increase was partially offset by our repayment in September 2003 of the $6.4 million balance under a term loan we entered into in 1999 with an initial aggregate principal amount of $55.0 million, resulting in a $0.2 million reduction of interest expense.

Income taxes

Our income tax benefit for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $8.0 million, or 24.2% of our loss before income taxes, as compared to $1.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, or 15.1% of our loss before income taxes. Our income tax benefit for the year ended December 31, 2004 was higher than for the same period in 2003 because we incurred expenses in 2004 that were deductible for tax purposes which we did not incur in 2003.

Comparison of the year ended December 31, 2003 to the year ended December 31, 2002

Our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $7.4 million as compared to $8.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, representing a decrease of $1.2 million, or 14.0%, in net loss. This reduction in net loss was due primarily to increased gross profit from the delivery of 613 additional railcars, which was partially offset by an increase in selling, general and administrative expenses of $1.5 million, which included a finder’s fee of $1.8 million that we paid to a third party for securing a major railcar purchase order for us in early 2003. Our in-house sales personnel generally procure railcar purchase orders, and we do not ordinarily pay finder’s fees to obtain railcar purchase orders. Net loss attributable to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $8.5 million as compared to $9.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. The difference between net loss and net loss attributable to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2003 reflects $1.1 million of accumulated dividends on our redeemable preferred stock.

Sales

Our sales for the year ended December 31, 2003 were $244.3 million as compared to $225.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, representing an increase of $18.8 million, or 8.4%, in sales. This increase was due to our delivery of an additional 613 railcars in 2003, which increased sales by $38.6 million. The additional deliveries of railcars in 2003 reflect the increased demand for coal-carrying railcars. This increase was offset in part by a decrease in sales in 2003 from rebuilding of railcars, which reduced sales by $18.2 million, and a decrease in sales from managing leased railcars, sales of used railcars and the sales of parts, which decreased sales by an additional $1.5 million in 2003.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Gross profit

Our gross profit in the year ended December 31, 2003 was $19.1 million as compared to $12.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2002, representing an increase of $6.2 million, or 48.2%, in gross profit. The gross profit from our delivery of an additional 613 railcars in 2003 when compared to 2002 was offset by the non-recurrence in 2003 of gross profit in 2002 relating to our rebuilding of railcars, managing leased railcars, sales of used railcars and the sales of parts. As a result, our gross profit margin increased to 7.8% in 2003 from 5.7% in 2002. Additionally, the 2002 gross profit included a $1.2 million curtailment gain related to our postretirement benefit program as a result of the layoff of a significant number of unionized employees at our Johnstown facility.

Selling, general and administrative expenses

Our selling, general and administrative expenses in the year ended December 31, 2003 were $14.3 million as compared to $12.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2002, representing an increase of $1.5 million or 12.1%. The increase in our selling, general and administrative expenses in 2003 was due primarily to a finder’s fee of $1.8 million that we paid to a third party for securing a major purchase order for us in early 2003. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased to 5.9% of sales in the year ended December 31, 2003 from 5.7% in the year ended December 31, 2002.

Interest expense

Our interest expense was $12.7 million and $11.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The interest on the rights to additional acquisition consideration increased our interest expense in 2003 by $0.9 million when compared to 2002.

Income taxes

Our income tax benefit in the year ended December 31, 2003 was $1.3 million, or 15.1% of loss before income taxes, as compared to $3.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2002, or 29.2% of loss before income taxes. The decrease in our income tax rate in 2003 was primarily the result of an increase in the valuation allowance for net operating loss carryforwards and net deferred tax assets under Pennsylvania state law and the impact of the nondeductible interest expense accruing on the rights to additional acquisition consideration.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

Our primary source of liquidity historically has been the cash generated from our operations. To a lesser extent, we have used funds generated from borrowings of long-term debt. Our primary sources of liquidity for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were proceeds from our initial public offering and cash generated from operations. For the six months ended June 30, 2004, our primary source of liquidity was provided by our cash position held at the beginning of the period. From the six months ended June 30, 2004 to the six months ended June 30, 2005, we had an increase in net cash provided by operating activities of $20.9 million. See “—Cash flows.”

We completed an initial public offering on April 11, 2005 and issued 5.1 million shares at an offering price of $19.00 per share. Net proceeds from the offering and available cash have been used to, among other things, repay all of our long-term debt with the exception of certain capital leases, redeem all of our outstanding redeemable preferred stock and pay the additional acquisition consideration related to the acquisition of our business in 1999. Our long-term debt in existence immediately prior to our initial public offering consisted of our 15% senior notes due June 30, 2008 in the original principal amount of

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

$25.0 million (which we refer to as the senior notes and which term includes the additional senior notes issued in payment of interest payable on the senior notes), our term loan having an original principal amount of $9.0 million and our $5.2 million variable demand industrial revenue bonds. Immediately upon the completion of the offering, we paid all amounts due under the rights to additional acquisition consideration and the term loan. The amounts due under the senior notes were placed in escrow and, upon expiration of the notice period, were paid on April 26, 2005. In addition, the amount necessary to repay in full our industrial revenue bonds was placed in escrow and, upon expiration of the notice period, was paid on May 26, 2005.

The proceeds of the offering and available cash were used as follows: $48.4 million was used for the repayment of the senior notes; $35.0 million was used for payment under the rights to additional acquisition consideration; $13.0 million was used for the redemption of the redeemable preferred stock; $5.4 million was used for the repayment of the term loan; $5.2 million was used for the repayment of the industrial revenue bonds; and $0.9 million was used for payments related to the termination of management services and other agreements. In conjunction with these payments, early termination fees of $0.1 million and a write-off of deferred financing costs of $0.4 million, each related to the term loan repayment, were recorded in April 2005. In addition, in April 2005, we recorded charges of $0.8 million related to unamortized discount on the senior notes and $4.6 million related to the additional accretion under the rights to additional acquisition consideration. The effects of the offering and payments noted above resulted in an aggregate pre-tax charge to operations of $6.8 million in the second quarter of 2005. Additionally, the estimated deferred offering costs of $4.8 million were recorded as a reduction in additional paid in capital.

On April 11, 2005, concurrent with the completion of the initial public offering, we entered into an Amended and Restated Credit Agreement providing for the terms of our revolving credit facility with LaSalle Bank National Association, as administrative agent, and the lenders party thereto. The revolving credit facility replaced our former $20.0 million revolving credit facility with LaSalle Bank National Association. See “Description of indebtedness” for a summary of the terms of our revolving credit facility. The revolving credit facility provides for a $50.0 million revolving credit line, including a letter of credit sub-facility that may not exceed $30.0 million. The revolving credit facility has a term of three years. Our assets and the assets of our subsidiaries serve as collateral for borrowings under the revolving credit facility. The Borrowing Base, as defined in the revolving credit agreement, is the lesser of the $50.0 million revolving commitment or an amount equal to a percentage of eligible accounts receivable plus percentages of eligible finished inventory and eligible semi-finished inventory, respectively. Borrowings under the revolving credit facility bear interest at the LIBOR rate plus an applicable margin of between 1.75% and 3.00%, which is determined based on our leverage ratio. We pay a commitment fee of between 0.25% and 0.50% on the unused portion of the revolving credit facility. As of June 30, 2005, we had no outstanding borrowings under the revolving credit facility, we had $9.0 million in letters of credit under the letter of credit sub-facility and we had the ability to borrow $38.1 million under the revolving credit facility.

Our revolving credit facility has ongoing maintenance financial covenants based on EBITDA and restrictions on our capital expenditures. Financial covenants under the revolving credit agreement include maximum ratios of senior debt to EBITDA (“senior leverage ratio”) and total funded debt to EBITDA (“total leverage ratio”); minimum interest coverage ratio (“interest coverage ratio”), a minimum tangible net worth and limitations on capital expenditures and dividends. More specifically, for each period of four consecutive fiscal quarters ending on the last day of a fiscal quarter, the maximum senior leverage ratio is 3.25 to 1.00 on or before June 30, 2006 and 3.00 to 1.00 thereafter; the maximum total leverage ratio is 3.75 to 1.00 on or before June 30, 2006 and 3.50 to 1.00 thereafter; and the interest coverage ratio may not be less than 3.50 to 1.00. Further, for each fiscal quarter commencing June 30, 2005,

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

tangible net worth may not be less than $(22.4) million, plus 65% of consolidated net income. The aggregate amount of capital expenditures may not exceed $10.0 million in any fiscal year, with this amount to be increased up to $15.0 million depending upon any carry-forwards of unused capital expenditures in the prior fiscal year. We are restricted in payment dividends in excess of $10.0 million in any fiscal year. For the purpose of calculating interest coverage and leverage ratios under the revolving credit agreement, through September 30, 2005, EBITDA is adjusted to include up to $9.2 million in connection with the settlement of labor disputes; non-cash expenses in 2004 relating to our stock option plan; and losses on a customer contract for boxcars in 2004. The EBITDA-based ratios under the revolving credit facility are material because our failure to comply with these covenants will result in an event of default under the credit agreement governing the revolving credit facility. An event of default may lead to the acceleration of any and all amounts due under the revolving credit facility, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and liquidity, depending on the amounts then due under the revolving credit facility.

As of June 30, 2005, we no longer had any remaining restricted cash. Restricted cash in the amount of $13.0 million was released during the three months ended June 30, 2005 as follows: $7.5 million held as additional collateral under the former revolving credit facility was released when we entered into the new revolving credit agreement; $1.2 million held in escrow as security for worker’s compensation insurance was replaced by a letter of credit; and $4.3 million held in escrow for a residual support guaranty relating to railcars we sold to a financial institution that are leased by a third-party customer was released by the financial institution. We have been notified that the third-party customer has exercised its option to purchase the railcars on September 1, 2005 pursuant to the lease agreement. Upon the closing of the sale of the railcars, we will have no further obligations under the residual support guaranty agreement. We expect to recognize deferred revenue of $5.3 million without any corresponding expense upon the closing of the sale of the railcars.

Based on our current level of operations and our anticipated growth, we believe that our proceeds from operating cash flows, together with amounts available under our revolving credit facility, will be sufficient to meet our anticipated liquidity needs for the remainder of 2005. Our long-term liquidity is contingent upon future operating performance and our ability to continue to meet financial covenants under our revolving credit facility and any other indebtedness. We may also require additional capital in the future to fund capital investments, acquisitions or development of railcars, and these capital requirements could be substantial. Our operating performance is materially impacted by gross margins on the sales of railcars. A majority of our existing contracts to manufacture railcars, and we anticipate that the majority of new contracts to manufacture railcars, will allow us to increase the purchase prices of our railcars to reflect the increase cost of raw materials. As of June 30, 2005, we had only one remaining fixed-price contract reflecting a backlog of 66 railcars, and we expect to deliver all of the railcars under this contract by September 30, 2005. Accordingly, management believes that potential losses on the remaining fixed-price contract will not materially impact our liquidity and future results of operations. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—The current high cost of the raw materials that we use to manufacture railcars, especially aluminum and steel, and delivery delays associated with these raw materials may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.”

Our long-term liquidity needs also depend to a significant extent on our obligations related to our pension and welfare benefit plans. We provide pension and retiree welfare benefits to certain salaried and hourly employees upon their retirement. The most significant assumptions used in determining our net periodic benefit costs are the discount rate used on our pension and postretirement welfare obligations, expected return on pension plan assets and the health care cost trend rate for our postretirement welfare obligations. As of December 31, 2004, our accumulated benefit obligation under our defined benefit

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

pension plans exceeded the fair value of plan assets by $18.5 million. Our management expects that any future obligations under our pension plans that are not currently funded will be funded out of our future cash flow from operations. As a result of the Johnstown settlement, we will contribute a fixed amount for pension costs. We made contributions of $4.8 million in 2004 and expect to make contributions of approximately $4.0 million in 2005 relating to pension costs, of which $1.7 million in contributions were made during the six months ended June 30, 2005.

Based upon our operating performance, capital requirements and obligations under our pension and welfare benefit plans, we may, from time to time, be required to raise additional funds through additional offerings of our common stock and through long-term borrowings. There can be no assurance that long-term debt, if needed, will be available on terms attractive to us, or at all. Furthermore, any additional equity financing may be dilutive to stockholders and debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants. Our failure to raise capital if and when needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Cash flows

The following table summarizes our net cash provided by or used in operating activities, investing activities and financing activities and our capital expenditures for the periods presented (in thousands):


	Year ended December 31,									Six months ended June 30,
Cash flows	2002			2003			2004			2004			2005
Net cash provided by (used in):
Operating activities	$	3,817		$	18,376		$	(560	)	$	301		$	21,234
Investing activities		(608	)		(7,951	)		(3,472	)		(753	)		7,625
Financing activities		(8,517	)		(10,142	)		(4,763	)		(1,750	)		(19,605	)
Capital expenditures		(553	)		(369	)		(2,215	)		(728	)		(5,330	)

The table above and the following discussion of our cash flows give effect to the restatement discussed in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements.

Operating Activities. Our net cash provided by or used in operating activities reflects net income or loss adjusted for non-cash charges and changes in net working capital (including non-current assets and liabilities). Cash flows from operating activities are affected by several factors, including fluctuations in business volume, contract terms for billings and collections, the timing of collections on our contract receivables, processing of bi-weekly payroll and associated taxes, and payment to our suppliers. Our working capital accounts also fluctuate from quarter to quarter due to the timing of certain events, such as the payment or non-payment for our railcars. We do not usually experience business credit issues, although a payment may be delayed pending completion of closing documentation, and a typical order of railcars may not yield cash proceeds until after the end of a reporting period.

Our net cash provided by operating activities for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was $21.2 million as compared to net cash provided by operating activities of $0.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. The increase of $20.9 million in net cash provided by operating activities was primarily due to a $19.1 million increase in net income. The change in the primary elements of net working capital, which consist of accounts receivable, inventory and accounts payable, resulted in a $9.9 million use of cash for the six months ended June 30, 2005, primarily due to cash used for accounts payable of $11.9 million. The cash used for the primary working capital accounts was offset by cash provided by the other operating assets and liabilities and non-cash expenses.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Our net cash used in operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $0.6 million as compared to net cash provided by operating activities of $18.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The increase of $19.0 million in cash used in operating activities was primarily due to the additional use of $9.3 million of cash for other working capital items, the increase of $6.0 million in our net loss adjusted for non-cash items, the additional use of $4.3 million in cash for accounts receivable and inventories, net of accounts payable, and the $3.5 million increase in cash used for payroll, pensions and postretirement obligations. Cash flow from our increased sales was offset by increases in the cost of raw materials, losses on customer contracts and increases in selling, general and administrative expenses. Our accounts receivable and inventories, net of accounts payable, increased as a result of the higher sales levels in 2004 as compared to 2003. These additional uses of cash were offset by a $4.1 million reduction in cash used for warranty costs.

Our net cash provided by operating activities was $18.4 million and $3.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The increase of $14.6 million in our net cash provided by operating activities in 2003 compared to 2002 was primarily due to cash used by accounts receivable and inventories, net of accounts payable, which totaled $0.8 million as well as a $4.7 million refund of our 1999 federal income taxes. Our accounts receivable and inventories, net of accounts payable, were a use of cash because sales in 2003 were higher than those in 2002. This increase was partially offset by reduced operating income and other changes in working capital accounts.

Investing Activities. Net cash provided by investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was $7.6 million as compared to $0.8 million of net cash used in investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Net cash used in investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2004 consisted solely of capital expenditures, while net cash provided by investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2005 consisted of the release of restricted cash and capital expenditures. The $7.6 million of net cash provided by investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2005 includes the release of $13.0 million of restricted cash, offset by capital expenditures of $5.3 million. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, $4.7 million of the $5.3 million of total capital expenditures during the period was used for the expansion of production capacity at our manufacturing facility in Roanoke, Virginia.

Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $3.5 million as compared to $8.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2003. Net cash used in investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 consisted of capital expenditures and restricted cash deposits. The capital expenditure levels for both periods were lower than our historical expenditure levels, reflecting unfavorable industry conditions.

Net cash used in investing activities was $8.0 million and $0.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The increase was mainly due to the requirement that we hold $7.5 million as cash collateral under our former revolving credit agreement that we entered into in 2003.

Financing Activities. Net cash used in financing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was $19.6 million as compared to $1.8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. Cash used in financing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2004 consisted of long-term debt repayments applicable to our term loan. During the six months ended June 30, 2004, in addition to the regular monthly payments of approximately $0.2 million per month, we made a $0.8 million balloon payment on our term loan in accordance with the agreement governing the term loan concerning the payment of proceeds from the sale of rebuilt aggregate railcars. Net cash used in financing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2005 included net proceeds from the issuance of common stock of $87.3 million; payments on long-term debt of $59.0 million; redemption of redeemable preferred stock of $13.0

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

million; and payments of additional acquisition consideration of $35.0 million. The payments on long-term debt included $48.4 million for the repurchase of the senior notes; $5.4 million for the repayment of the term loan; and $5.2 million for the repayment of the industrial revenue bonds.

Net cash used in financing activities was $4.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to $10.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. During the year ended December 31, 2004, we made a $2.7 million repayment on our term loan and incurred $2.0 million of costs in connection with our initial public offering. Additionally, we repaid the $6.4 million balance of our prior term loan and the $1.9 million balance of our $2.5 million term loan. Also during 2003, we made $0.5 million of scheduled repayments on our term loan. The remaining $1.4 million reflects deferred financing costs related to the term loan and our former revolving credit facility.

Net cash used in financing activities was $10.1 million and $8.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. In 2003, we borrowed $9.0 million under the term loan and used the borrowings to repay in part the senior notes, which resulted in no net cash used in financing activities.

Capital expenditures

Our capital expenditures were $5.3 million in the six months ended June 30, 2005 as compared to $0.7 million in the six months ended June 30, 2004. For the six months ended June 30, 2005, $4.7 million of the $5.3 million total capital expenditures was used for the expansion of production capacity at our manufacturing facility in Roanoke, Virginia. The remaining $0.6 million of capital expenditures for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was comprised of expenditures for machinery and equipment at our Johnstown and Danville production facilities. Capital spending for the six months ended June 30, 2004 consisted of machinery and equipment expenditures. Total capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2005 are expected to be approximately $7.3 million.

Our capital expenditures were $2.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to $0.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2003. The capital expenditure levels for both periods are lower than our historical expenditure levels, reflecting our decision to reduce spending until economic conditions in our industry have fully recovered. Our capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2004 consisted mainly of the replacement of equipment.

Capital expenditures were $0.4 million and $0.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The decrease in capital expenditures in 2003 as compared to 2002 was primarily due to unfavorable industry conditions during 2003.

Excluding capital expenditures associated with the Roanoke facility, management expects that capital expenditures will return to more typical levels of $3.0 million per year beginning in 2006. These expenditures will be used to maintain our existing facilities in Danville and Johnstown and update manufacturing equipment as well as to increase tooling and equipment to meet the forecasted increase in demand for railcars over the next five years. Management continuously evaluates manufacturing facility requirements based upon market demand and may elect to make capital investments at higher levels in the future. In December 2004, we entered into an agreement to lease a railcar manufacturing facility in Roanoke, Virginia. See “—Recent developments.” We expect our capital expenditures in connection with the new manufacturing facility to be approximately $5.7 million in 2005. In response to the current demand for our railcars, we are considering the addition of another manufacturing facility and exploring other opportunities to increase our production capacity. We expect to fund our capital expenditures through cash provided by operating activities.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Contractual obligations

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of June 30, 2005 and the effect that these obligations and commitments would be expected to have on our liquidity and cash flow in future periods:


	Payments Due by Period
Contractual Obligations	Total		1 Year		2-3 Years		4-5 Years		After 5 Years
	(in thousands)
Capital leases	$	36	$	8	$	19	$	9	$	—
Operating leases		10,212		1,232		2,175		2,028		4,777
Aluminum purchases		67,013		67,013		—		—		—

Total	$	77,261	$	68,253	$	2,194	$	2,037	$	4,777

In addition to the contractual obligations set forth above, we also will have interest payment obligations on any borrowings under the revolving credit facility. See “Description of indebtedness.”

We also pay consulting fees to a director who is also one of our stockholders. The amount paid for his consulting services was $50,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004 and $25,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2005. The agreement governing this arrangement will expire in 2008. See “Certain relationships and related party transactions—Management services agreements, deferred financing fee agreement and consulting agreement.”

We are a party to employment agreements with our President and Chief Executive Officer, our Vice President, Finance, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary, our Vice President, Planning and Administration, and our Senior Vice President, Marketing and Sales. See “Management—Executive compensation—Employment and non-competition agreements” regarding the terms and conditions of these employment agreements.

We are also required to make minimum contributions to our pension and postretirement welfare plans. See “—Critical accounting policies—Pensions and postretirement benefits” regarding our expected contributions to our pension plans and our expected postretirement welfare benefit costs for 2005.

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

We are exposed to interest rate risk on the borrowings under our revolving credit facility. As of June 30, 2005, there were no borrowings under the revolving credit facility and we had issued approximately $9.0 million in letters of credit under the sub-facility for letters of credit. We are exposed to interest rate risk on the borrowings under the revolving credit facility and do not plan to enter into swaps or other hedging arrangements to manage this risk, because we do not believe this interest rate risk to be significant. On an annual basis, a 1% change in the interest rate in our revolving credit facility will increase or decrease our interest expense by $10,000 for every $1.0 million of outstanding borrowings.

We are exposed to price risks associated with the purchase of raw materials, especially aluminum and steel. The cost of aluminum, steel and all other materials used in the production of our railcars represents a significant component of our direct manufacturing costs. Given the significant increases in the price of raw materials since November 2003, this exposure can affect our costs of production. We currently do not plan to enter into any hedging arrangements to manage the price risks associated with raw materials.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Instead, we have either renegotiated existing contracts or entered into new contracts with a majority of our customers that allow for variable pricing to protect us against future changes in the cost of raw materials. As a result, all but one of our contracts for railcars in our backlog at June 30, 2005 permit us to pass through charges related to increases in the cost of raw materials to our customers. However, we may not always be able to pass on these increases in the future. In particular, when raw material prices increase rapidly or to levels significantly higher than normal, we may not be able to pass price increases through to our customers, which could adversely affect our operating margins and cash flows. In the event that we are able to increase the prices of our railcars, any such price increases may reduce demand for our railcars. The current high cost of the raw materials that we use to manufacture railcars, especially aluminum and steel, and delivery delays associated with these raw materials may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—The current high cost of the raw materials that we use to manufacture railcars, especially aluminum and steel, and delivery delays associated with these raw materials may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.”

To the extent that we are unsuccessful in passing on increases in the cost of aluminum and steel to our customers, a 1% increase in the cost of aluminum and steel would increase our average cost of sales by approximately $200 per railcar, which, for the six months ended June 30, 2005, would have reduced income before income taxes by approximately $1.1 million.

We are not exposed to any significant foreign currency exchange risks as our policy is to denominate foreign sales in U.S. dollars.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

We prepare our consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of our financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of sales and expenses during the reporting period. Significant estimates include long-lived assets, goodwill, pension and postretirement benefit assumptions, the valuation reserve on the net deferred tax asset, warranty accrual and contingencies and litigation. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Our critical accounting policies include the following:

Long-lived assets

We evaluate long-lived assets, including property, plant and equipment, under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, which addresses financial accounting and reporting for the impairment of long-lived assets and for long-lived assets to be disposed of. For assets to be held or used, we group a long-lived asset or assets with other assets and liabilities at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and liabilities. An impairment loss for an asset group reduces only the carrying amounts of a long-lived asset or assets of the group being evaluated. Our estimates of future cash flows used to test the recoverability of a long-lived asset group include only the future cash flows that are directly associated with and that are expected to arise as a direct result of the use and eventual disposition of the asset group. Our future cash flow estimates exclude interest charges. There were no impairment losses on long-lived assets recorded during 2002, 2003, 2004 or 2005.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Impairment of goodwill and intangible assets

We have recorded on our balance sheet both goodwill and intangible assets, which consist primarily of patents and an intangible asset related to our defined benefit plans. Historically, goodwill and intangible assets were reviewed for impairment when events or other changes in circumstances had indicated that the carrying amount of the assets may not be recoverable. In conjunction with the adoption of SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, on January 1, 2002, we tested all goodwill and intangible assets for impairment. These tests were performed again on January 1, 2003, January 1, 2004 and January 1, 2005 in accordance with SFAS No. 142. We have not noted any such impairment.

We test goodwill for impairment at least annually based on management’s assessment of the fair value of our assets as compared to their carrying value. Additional steps, including an allocation of the estimated fair value to our assets and liabilities, would be necessary to determine the amount, if any, of goodwill impairment if the fair value of our assets were less than their carrying value. The process of assessing fair value involves management making estimates with respect to future sales volume, pricing, economic and industry data, anticipated cost environment and overall market conditions, and because these estimates form the basis for the determination of whether or not an impairment charge should be recorded, these estimates are considered to be critical accounting estimates.

Our method to determine fair value to test goodwill for impairment considers three valuation approaches: the discounted cash flow method, the guideline company method and the transaction method. The results of each of these three methods are reviewed by management and a fair value is then assigned. For our January 1, 2005 valuation date, management estimated that the fair value of our company exceeded the carrying value of our company by approximately $194 million.

The discounted cash flow method involves significant judgment based on a market-derived rate of return to discount short-term and long-term projections of the future performance of our company. The major assumptions that influence future performance include:

volume projections based on an industry-specific outlook for railcar demand and specifically coal railcar demand;

estimated margins on railcar sales; and

weighted-average cost of capital (or WACC) used to discount future performance of our company.

We use industry data to estimate volume projections in our discounted cash flow method. We believe that this independent industry data is the best indicator of expected future performance assuming that we maintain a consistent market share, which management believes is supportable based on historical performance. A negative 10% adjustment to the volume projections used in the discounted cash flow method would reduce the excess of the fair value of our company compared to its carrying value by approximately $36 million.

Our estimated margins used in the discounted cash flow method are based primarily on historical margins. At January 1, 2005, we did not have a significant number of contracts which provided for raw material cost escalation, which subjected our margins and future performance to variability primarily in the event of changes in the price of aluminum and steel. Aluminum and steel prices have historically accounted for approximately 30% to 35% of our total cost of sales. Changes in aluminum and steel prices typically only affect margins on signed contracts for railcars forming part of our backlog as management historically has used aluminum and steel prices at the time a contract is signed as the basis for its selling price. However, the price of raw materials has increased significantly since November

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

2003. A 10% increase in aluminum and steel prices for backlog and projected volume in the discounted cash flow method would reduce the excess of the fair value of our company compared to its carrying value by approximately $117 million. Since January 1, 2005, when our goodwill was reviewed for impairment, we have renegotiated our contracts with a majority of our customers to increase the purchase price of our railcars to reflect the increased cost of raw materials and, as a result, we were to able pass on to our customers approximately 40% of the increased raw material costs with respect to railcars that we produced and delivered in 2004. In addition, we have entered into customer contracts that allow for variable pricing to protect us against future changes in the cost of raw materials so that, as of June 30, 2005, all but one of our customer contracts allowed for such variable pricing. In addition, we have entered into contracts with a majority of our customers that allow for variable pricing to protect against future changes in the cost of raw materials. However, there is no assurance that our customers will accept variable pricing in the future. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—The current high cost of the raw materials that we use to manufacture railcars, especially aluminum and steel, and delivery delays associated with these raw materials may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.”

The WACC used to discount our future performance in the discounted cash flow method is based on an estimated rate of return of companies in our industry and interest rates for corporate debt rated “Baa” or the equivalent by Moody’s Investors Service. Management estimated a WACC of 16% for the January 1, 2005 goodwill impairment valuation analysis based on our mix of equity and debt. An increase in the WACC to 20% in the discounted cash flow method would reduce the excess of the fair value of our company compared to its carrying value by approximately $60 million.

The assumptions supporting our estimated future cash flows, including the discount rate used and estimated terminal value, reflect our best estimates.

The guideline company method and transaction method use market valuation multiples of similar publicly traded companies for the guideline company method and recent transactions for the transaction method and, as a result, involve less judgment in their application.

Impairment of definite-lived intangibles is determined to exist when undiscounted cash flows related to the assets are less than the carrying value of the assets. These cash flow estimates are based on reasonable and supportable assumptions and consider all available evidence. However, there is inherent uncertainty in estimating future cash flows.

Pensions and postretirement benefits

We provide pension and retiree welfare benefits to certain salaried and hourly employees upon their retirement. The most significant assumptions used in determining our net periodic benefit costs are the expected return on pension plan assets and the health care cost trend rate for our postretirement welfare obligations.

In 2004, we assumed that the expected long-term rate of return on pension plan assets would be 9.0%. As permitted under SFAS 87, the assumed long-term rate of return on assets is applied to a calculated value of plan assets, which recognizes changes in the fair value of plan assets in a systematic manner over five years. This produces the expected return on plan assets that is included in our net periodic benefit cost. The difference between this expected return and the actual return on plan assets is deferred. The net deferral of past asset gains (losses) affects the calculated value of plan assets and, ultimately, future net

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

periodic benefit cost. We review the expected return on plan assets annually and would revise it if conditions should warrant. A change of one percentage point in the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets would have the following effect:


	1% Increase			1% Decrease
	(in thousands)
Effect on net periodic benefit cost	$	(133	)	$	133

For our postretirement welfare plans, we assumed a 10.0% annual rate of increase in health care costs for 2004, with the rate of increase declining gradually to an ultimate rate of 5.0% by the year 2009 and remaining at that level thereafter. We review the health care cost trend annually and would revise it if conditions should warrant. A change of one percentage point in the expected health care trend would have the following effect:


	1% Increase		1% Decrease
	(in thousands)
Effect on total of service and interest cost	$	197	$	(152	)
Effect on postretirement benefit obligation		2,207		(1,824	)

At the end of each year, we determine the discount rate to be used to calculate the present value of our pension and postretirement welfare plan liabilities. The discount rate is an estimate of the current interest rate at which our pension liabilities could be effectively settled at the end of the year. In estimating this rate, we look to rates of return on high-quality, fixed-income investments that receive one of the two highest ratings given by a recognized ratings agency. At December 31, 2004, we determined this rate to be 6.00%, a decrease of 0.25% from the 6.25% rate used at December 31, 2003.

For the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004, and the six months ended June 30, 2005, we recognized consolidated pre-tax pension cost of $2.8 million, $4.4 million and $2.1 million, respectively. The increase in our 2004 consolidated pre-tax pension cost was primarily due to $1.7 million of costs incurred in connection with the Johnstown settlement. We currently expect that our consolidated pension cost for 2005 will be approximately $4.1 million. We currently expect to contribute approximately $4.0 million to our pension plans during 2005. However, we may elect to adjust the level of contributions based on a number of factors, including performance of pension investments, changes in interest rates and changes in workforce compensation.

For the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004, and the six months ended June 30, 2005, we recognized a consolidated pre-tax postretirement welfare benefit cost of $1.4 million, $7.1 million and $3.0 million, respectively. The increase in our 2004 consolidated pre-tax postretirement cost was primarily due to $4.4 million of costs incurred in connection with the Johnstown settlement. We currently expect that the consolidated postretirement welfare benefit cost for 2005 will be approximately $6.0 million. We currently expect to pay approximately $2.8 million during 2005 (of which $1.4 million has been paid as of June 30, 2005) in postretirement welfare benefits.

Income taxes

Management judgment is required in developing our provision for income taxes, including the determination of deferred tax assets, liabilities and any valuation allowances recorded against the deferred tax assets. We evaluate quarterly the realizability of our net deferred tax assets and assess the valuation allowance, adjusting the amount of such allowance, if necessary. The factors used to assess the likelihood of realization are our forecast of future taxable income and the availability of tax planning

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

strategies that can be implemented to realize the net deferred tax assets. Failure to achieve forecasted taxable income might affect the ultimate realization of the net deferred tax assets. Factors that may affect our ability to achieve sufficient forecasted taxable income include, but are not limited to, increased competition, a decline in sales or margins and loss of market share.

At June 30, 2005, we had total net deferred tax assets of $25.1 million. Although realization of our net deferred tax assets is not certain, management has concluded that we will more likely than not realize the full benefit of the deferred tax assets. At June 30, 2005, we had a valuation allowance of $3.8 million, based on our management’s conclusion that it was more likely than not that certain of our net deferred tax assets in Pennsylvania would not be realized.

We provide for deferred income taxes based on differences between the book and tax bases of our assets and liabilities and for items that are reported for financial statement purposes in periods different from those for income tax reporting purposes. The deferred tax liability or asset amounts are based upon the enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the periods in which the deferred tax liability or asset is expected to be settled or realized. The deferred tax liabilities and assets that we record relate to the enacted federal and Illinois tax rates, since net operating loss carryforwards and deferred tax assets arising under Pennsylvania state law have been fully reserved. A 1% change in the rate of federal income taxes would increase or decrease our deferred tax assets by $0.7 million. A 1% change in the rate of Illinois income taxes would increase or decrease our deferred tax assets by $0.3 million.

Product warranties

We establish a warranty reserve for new railcar sales and estimate the amount of the warranty accrual based on the history of warranty claims for the type of railcar, adjusted for significant known claims in excess of established reserves. Warranty terms are based on the negotiated railcar sales contracts and typically are for periods of five years or less. Historically, the majority of warranty claims occur in the first three years of the warranty period.

Revenue recognition

We generally manufacture railcars under firm orders from third parties. We recognize revenue on new and rebuilt railcars when we complete the individual railcars, the railcars are accepted by the customer following inspection, the risk for any damage or other loss with respect to the railcars passes to the customer and title to the railcars transfers to the customer. Revenue from leasing is recognized ratably during the lease term. Pursuant to Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Non-Monetary Transactions, and Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) Issue No. 01-2, Interpretations of APB No-29, on transactions involving used railcar trades, we recognize revenue for the entire transaction when the cash consideration is in excess of 25% of the total transaction value and on a pro rata portion of the total transaction value when the cash consideration is less than 25% of the total transaction value. We value used railcars received at their estimated fair market value at date of receipt less a normal profit margin.

Compensation expense under stock option agreements

Management judgment is required in estimating the compensation expense under stock option agreements. The compensation expense is recorded at the estimated fair value of the 2004 Options to purchase Units, consisting of 550 shares of our common stock and one share of our Series A voting preferred stock. On April 11, 2005, we adopted the 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan, pursuant to which we granted options to purchase shares of our common stock to certain of our executive officers.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

Determining the compensation expense under stock option agreements requires complex and subjective judgments. Our approach to valuation is based on using market multiples of comparable companies, our cash flows and other data which give management indicators of the fair value of the 2004 Options. There is inherent uncertainty in making these estimates.

Contingencies and litigation

We are subject to the possibility of various loss contingencies related to certain legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. We consider the likelihood of loss or the incurrence of a liability, as well as our ability to reasonably estimate the amounts of loss, in the determination of loss contingencies. We accrue an estimated loss contingency when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. We regularly evaluate current information available to us based on our ongoing monitoring activities to determine whether the accruals should be adjusted. If the amount of the actual loss is greater than the amount we have accrued, this would have an adverse impact on our operating results in that period.

RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

In January 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. (FIN) 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, which was later amended on December 24, 2003 (FIN 46R). FIN 46R explains how to identify variable interest entities and how an enterprise assesses its interest in a variable interest entity to decide whether to consolidate that entity. FIN 46R requires unconsolidated variable interest entities to be consolidated by their primary beneficiaries if the entities do not effectively disperse the risks and rewards of ownership among their owners and other parties involved. The provisions of FIN 46R are generally effective for periods ending after December 31, 2003. We have no variable interest entities and, as a result, the adoption of FIN 46, as amended by FIN 46R, had no impact on our financial statements.

In May 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity, including the deferral of certain effective dates as a result of the provisions of FASB Staff Position 150-3, Effective Date, Disclosures and Transition for Mandatorily Redeemable Financial Instruments of Certain Nonpublic Entities and Certain Mandatorily Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests Under FASB Statement No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity, which establishes standards for how an issuer classifies and measures certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity. We adopted SFAS No. 150 effective January 1, 2004, as required. The adoption of SFAS No. 150 had no impact on our financial statements.

In December 2003, the FASB revised SFAS No. 132, Employers’ Disclosures about Pensions and Other Postretirement Benefits, to require additional disclosures about the assets, obligations, cash flows and net periodic benefit cost of defined benefit postretirement plans. We have adopted these additional disclosure requirements and included such disclosures in the notes to the financial statements.

In December 2003, FASB Staff Position (FSP) No. 106-1, Accounting and Disclosure Requirements Related to the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, or the Act, was released. FSP No. 106-1 was subsequently superseded by FSP No. 106-2. FSP No. 106-2 requires a sponsor of a postretirement health care plan that provides a prescription drug benefit to implement accounting for the effects of the Act for the first interim period beginning after June 15, 2004. The Act expands Medicare, primarily by adding a prescription drug benefit for Medicare-eligible retirees starting in 2006. Although detailed regulations necessary to implement the Act have not yet been finalized, we

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations

believe that drug benefits offered to the salaried retirees under our postretirement welfare plans will qualify for the subsidy under Medicare Part D. The effects of this subsidy were factored into the 2004 annual expense. The reduction in the benefit obligation attributable to past service cost was approximately $0.6 million and has been reflected as an actuarial gain. The reduction in expense for 2004 related to the Act was approximately $0.1 million.

In November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, Inventory Costs—An Amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, which requires the recognition of costs of idle facilities, excessive spoilage, double freight and rehandling costs as a component of current-period expenses. The provisions of SFAS No. 151 are effective for inventory costs incurred during fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. Since we produce railcars based upon specific customer orders, management does not expect the provisions of SFAS No. 151 to have a material impact on our financial statements.

In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153, Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets—An Amendment of APB Opinion No. 29. APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions, is based on the principle that exchanges of nonmonetary assets should be measured based on the fair value of the assets exchanged. The guidance in APB Opinion No. 29 included certain exceptions to that principle. SFAS No. 153 amends APB Opinion No. 29 to eliminate the exception for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets and replaces it with a general exception for exchanges of nonmonetary assets that do not have commercial substance. A nonmonetary exchange has commercial substance if the future cash flows of the entity are expected to change significantly as a result of the exchange. The provisions of SFAS No. 153 are effective for nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring in fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2005. Management has not yet evaluated the impact of the adoption of SFAS No. 153 on our financial statements. We plan to adopt SFAS No. 153 effective January 1, 2006 as required.

In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, which establishes the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments or certain liabilities based upon the entity’s equity instruments for goods or services. The revision to SFAS No. 123 generally requires that publicly traded companies measure the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the fair value of the award on the grant date. That cost will be recognized over the period during which an employee is required to provide service in exchange for the award, which is usually the vesting period. Management expects that the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) will be effective for our company beginning January 1, 2006. Management has not yet evaluated the impact of SFAS No. 123(R) on our financial statements.

Industry

OVERVIEW

The primary purchasers of railcars in North America are financial institutions, railroads and shippers, with relationships between railcar manufacturers and customers tending to be cooperative and long-term. Decisions to purchase railcars are usually based on price, delivery time and quality. Existing relationships between railcar manufacturers and their customers and manufacturer reputation are also important factors. Due to the length of a railcar’s useful life, which we believe is approximately 25 to 30 years, most customers buy railcars infrequently.

Rail transport is important to the North American economy. In 2001, railroads transported approximately 42% of the freight hauled in the United States, an increase from approximately 38% in 1990. A number of industries in North America rely heavily on rail for the transport of the various inputs and outputs associated with their operations, including coal, chemicals and related products, farm products, non-metallic minerals, food products, metals, building products, petroleum products, waste and scrap materials, forest and paper products, motor vehicles and related parts and metallic ores. The railcar industry has developed different types of railcars manufactured from steel and aluminum to transport these diverse goods, many with specific features designed to meet unique loading or unloading requirements or other aspects of the transported goods.

The main types of railcars are:

Hopper Railcars. Open-top hopper railcars are used primarily to transport coal, and covered hopper railcars are used to carry cargo, such as grain, dry fertilizer, plastic pellets and cement.

Gondola Railcars. Rotary gondola railcars are used primarily to transport coal and top-loading gondola railcars are used to transport a variety of commodities, such as coal, steel products and scrap metals.

Flat Railcars. Flat railcars are used primarily to transport a wide array of bulky items, such as automobiles, machinery, forestry products and heavy equipment.

Tank Railcars. Tank railcars are used primarily to transport liquid products, such as chemicals, liquid fertilizers and petroleum products.

Intermodal Railcars. Intermodal railcars are used primarily to transport containers and trailers that may also be transported by truck or ship, allowing cargo to be transported through different modes without loading and unloading.

Specialty Railcars. Any of the railcar types listed above may be further developed and customized with particular characteristics, depending on the nature of the materials being transported and customer specifications.

Industry

Box Railcars. Box railcars are enclosed railcars used primarily to transport food products, auto parts, wood products and paper products.

We primarily manufacture aluminum open-top hopper railcars and aluminum rotary gondola railcars used for the transport of coal. We believe that we are the leading manufacturer of aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars in North America. We also manufacture certain steel-bodied railcars and a variety of specialty railcars, including aluminum vehicle carriers, steel coil railcars and slab railcars.

CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS AFFECTING THE RAILCAR INDUSTRY

Cyclical nature of the railcar market

The North American railcar market is highly cyclical, and trends in the railcar industry are closely related to the overall level of economic activity. When the economy appears poised for sustained growth, users of railcars seek to benefit from the increased demand for rail freight services. As a result, the users generally tend to increase the size of their fleets and replace older railcars with newer railcars or railcars with greater capacity and durability. Conversely, when the economy slows down, these companies generally delay investment in new railcars and increase the utilization rates of railcars already in use, keeping them in service for longer periods. International trade activity can also affect North American demand for railcars, since railroads are also used to transport imported and exported goods to and from ports. In addition, supplies of materials, such as aluminum and steel, as well as finished railcar components, such as castings, are constrained from time to time, which limits the production capacity of companies in the railcar industry and results in further cyclical fluctuations.

The following chart shows the annual delivery of all types of railcars in North America since 1975 and projected annual delivery of railcars through 2010:

Historical and Projected North American Freight Railcar Deliveries

LOGO

Source: Railway Supply Institute; Economic Planning Associates, Inc.

As illustrated by the chart above, railcar demand was at a high in the late 1970s due, in particular, to the preferential tax treatment attributed to railcars under then-existing tax laws. The Tax Reform Act of 1981, which eliminated the preferential tax treatment of railcars beginning in 1983, as well as the economic recession in the early 1980s, led to the lowest levels of railcar production since World War II through most of the 1980s. However, during most of the 1990s, increased general economic activity,

Industry

increased demand for electricity, resulting in an increase in the use of coal, and higher import levels led to an increase in railcar deliveries. In addition, as railroads integrated their operations after a period of consolidation in the industry, railroads suffered from poor railcar utilization and aging fleets. We believe that railroads responded by ordering additional railcars, which led to a significant increase in railcar deliveries in 1998 and 1999. The railcar industry experienced another decline in production from 2001 to 2002, as the economic recession slowed industrial activity and demand for electricity, and more railroads integrated their operations, improved their railcar utilization and ordered fewer railcars. Railcar deliveries declined from a high of 75,704 railcars in 1998 to 17,736 in 2002, and grew to 46,871 in 2004.

We believe that the near-term outlook for railcar demand is positive due to the current economic recovery, which is resulting in the replacement of aging railcar fleets, an improved outlook for U.S. steel manufacturers and an increasing demand for electricity. Economic Planning Associates expects estimated railcar deliveries of 66,700 railcars in 2005, 65,000 railcars in 2006, 59,500 railcars in 2007 and 56,350 railcars in 2008, with the reduced estimated deliveries in 2006 reflecting fewer intermodal railcars and platform assemblies and reduced deliveries of box railcars. These projections are based on current backlog levels, which have historically been strong indicators of future deliveries. The following chart sets forth the historical backlog for the railcar industry:

Historical Railcar Backlog by Quarter

LOGO

Source: Railway Supply Institute

Replacement demand for the aging North American railcar fleet

In 2003, there were approximately 1.3 million railcars in circulation, and the average age of the railcar fleet has increased significantly over the last decade from approximately 16.5 years in 1990 to approximately 19.5 years in 2003. Since 1990, an average of 3.6% of all railcars were replaced annually. However, in 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004, 2.6%, 1.4%, 2.5% and 3.6%, respectively, of existing North American railcars have been replaced, which we believe was due primarily to the cyclical downturn in the industry. As economic conditions improve, we expect the replacement rate to return to historical levels. In North America, a railcar can be used for up to 50 years under existing regulations; however, we believe that the average life of a railcar is approximately 25 to 30 years. If a railcar has not completely exhausted its useful life, it may become outdated or less efficient relative to railcars manufactured with newer technology before the regulations require its replacement. We believe that replacement demand may increase as railcar freight companies compare their existing railcar fleets with railcars that have newer, more efficient technology.

Industry

Shift from steel-bodied to aluminum-bodied railcars

A majority of aluminum-bodied railcars are coal-carrying cars. In 2002, approximately 16% of all freight tonnage in the North American rail freight market was moved in aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars, compared to 9% in 1997. We believe that aluminum-bodied railcars are approximately 30% lighter than steel-bodied railcars and, due to its lighter weight, greater capacity and superior resistance to corrosion, aluminum is an attractive metal for some classes of railcars, in particular coal-carrying railcars. As a result of these benefits of using aluminum in railcars, we and our competitors have begun to introduce new aluminum designs for other types of railcars. Since aluminum-bodied railcars can reduce operating costs, increase asset utilization and lower maintenance costs, we believe purchasers of railcars have been increasingly considering aluminum-based railcars for certain railcar types.

Shift in customer base

Over the past 20 years, there has been a shift in the customer base for railcars, from railroads to financial institutions and shippers, which are purchasing significant numbers of new railcars. In the past, railroad companies had been the largest buyers. We believe that buyers of railcars have increasingly focused on factors such as total life-cycle costs and cost of capital when making their purchasing decisions. Additionally, customers are modernizing their fleets to take advantage of increased available load capacity provided by railcars with newer technology.

Consolidation

We believe that the sharp decline in railcar sales in the early to mid-1980s and the deregulation of the rail freight transportation industry have led the railcar manufacturing industry to consolidate. Additionally, railcar manufacturers are increasing their focus on their core railcar segments and areas of expertise. As a result, the number of companies that manufacture railcars primarily for third-party customers decreased from 24 companies in 1980 to four in 2004, with two additional companies primarily manufacturing railcars for their own leasing fleets.

TRENDS AFFECTING THE COAL-CARRYING RAILCAR BUSINESS

In January 2005, there were approximately 246,000 coal-carrying railcars in circulation, of which approximately 44% were aluminum-bodied railcars. Approximately 99% of coal-carrying railcars that have been delivered in the last five years were aluminum. We expect that the growth in coal usage will stimulate increased deliveries of coal-carrying railcars. According to Economic Planning Associates, coal-carrying railcar deliveries will increase from 7,480 units in 2004 to approximately 14,000 units in 2006 and 13,500 units in 2007, after which annual deliveries will average approximately 12,000 railcars per year until 2010.

The main factors affecting the use of coal are:

Increase in demand for electricity

We believe coal consumption should continue to expand as demand for electricity continues to increase. Coal currently supplies more than 50% of the electric power in the United States. According to the Energy Information Administration, electricity production of U.S. electric power producers increased by approximately 27% between 1990 and 2003. The increasing demand for power generation has been due primarily to the increasing level of economic activity. According to the Department of Energy, electricity

Industry

demand in the United States is expected to increase from approximately 3,481 billion kilowatt hours in 2003 to approximately 5,220 billion kilowatt hours in 2025. Coal-fired power generation is expected to continue to increase, leading to steady growth in the demand for coal.

Increase in demand for coal as a fuel source

In the United States, coal continues to fuel more electricity generation than all other energy sources combined. In 2004, coal-fueled plants generated an estimated 54% of all electricity used in the United States followed by nuclear plants with 22%, natural gas plants with 13%, renewable sources with 9% and petroleum-fueled plants with 3%. While electricity generation remained at stable levels in 2004, the rapid increase in natural gas prices, along with the readily available supply of coal at stable prices, enabled coal to gain market share.

Coal is one of the most abundant fossil fuels, and the incremental cost to add additional electricity generation capacity from coal is low compared to other fuels. According to Resource Data International Inc., coal-fueled plants have lower production costs than plants powered by other fuel types. Hydroelectric power is also inexpensive but is limited by geography. Nuclear energy is the cheapest to generate in completed, existing nuclear plants, but the cost of building new facilities is high. Coal-fueled electricity generating plants are, on average, operating below maximum capacity. Therefore, these plants can increase their electricity generation without substantial incremental capital costs, thereby improving coal’s overall cost competitiveness, assuming current environmental regulations are not changed or interpreted adversely.

Increase in demand for coal from the western United States

Largely as a result of sulfur dioxide emissions limitations mandated by the Clean Air Act, coal-burning utilities have used increasing quantities of lower-sulfur coal. Low-sulfur coal, which comes primarily from the Powder River Basin in Montana and Wyoming, is primarily transported by rail to utilities in the eastern United States. The increased travel distances, as compared to the distances involved in transporting high-sulfur coal from mines in the east to eastern power generation facilities, place greater stress on the current aging railcar fleets, which we believe will result in increasing replacement rates. According to the Energy Information Administration, the shift to selected low-sulfur Western and Appalachian supply areas was spurred by federal acid rain regulations. As deregulated railroads consolidated in the late 1980s and the 1990s, they moved to increase profits by facilitating longer-distance coal runs to Midwestern and Eastern utilities, using large unit trains with high-capacity cars (100 tons or greater), and by offering improved trackage, rates, and cycle times from Western coalfields. As a result, we believe that purchasers of coal-carrying railcars will expand their fleets and replace aging railcars with greater frequency in order to take advantage of increasing coal carloads.

Business

OVERVIEW

Our manufacturing facilities are located in Danville, Illinois, Johnstown, Pennsylvania and Roanoke, Virginia. Our Danville facility produced approximately 81% of our railcars manufactured during the year ended December 31, 2004 and 61% of our railcars manufactured during the six months ended June 30, 2005, and manufactured 100% and 68% of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars during the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. We believe that the operational efficiency of our Danville facility has increased over the last six years resulting in a significant reduction in our manufacturing costs. Our Johnstown facility manufactures small covered hopper railcars, coiled steel railcars, aluminum vehicle carrier railcars and aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. In April 2005, we commenced operations at a manufacturing facility that we have leased in Roanoke, Virginia. Our new Roanoke facility has the capability to manufacture a variety of types of railcars, including aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars. We delivered our first railcar manufactured at the Roanoke facility during the second quarter of 2005. See “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations—Recent developments.”

Our primary customers are financial institutions, railroads and shippers, which represented 38%, 31% and 31%, respectively, of our total sales attributable to each type of customer for the year ended December 31, 2004, and 28%, 20% and 52%, respectively, of our total sales attributable to each type of customer for the six months ended June 30, 2005. In 2004, we delivered 7,484 new railcars, including 5,840 aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars, and in the six months ended June 30, 2005, we delivered 5,704 new railcars, including 5,103 aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. Our total backlog of firm orders for new railcars increased from 11,397 railcars as of December 31, 2004 to 15,867 railcars as of June 30, 2005, representing estimated sales of $747.8 million and $1.1 billion, respectively, attributable to such backlog. Our sales for the six months ended June 30, 2005 were $396.5 million and our net income for the same period was $11.1 million. The following table shows the total number of railcars, including the number of coal-carrying and other railcars, that we delivered during the periods indicated:

Business

Deliveries

LOGO

The following table shows our total reported railcar backlog, including the reported backlog of coal-carrying and other railcars, at the end of the periods indicated:

Backlog

LOGO

See “—Backlog” for more information regarding our calculation of backlog.

OUR HISTORY

We and our predecessors have been manufacturing railcars since 1901. From 1923 to 1991, our business was owned and operated by Bethlehem Steel Corporation. In 1991, TTII purchased our business from Bethlehem Steel. At the time of this acquisition, our business consisted of two facilities in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. In 1995, we purchased our facility located in Danville, Illinois, which had previously been an abandoned manufacturing plant. In June 1999, TTII sold our railcar business to an investor group led by our management. We have since developed and expanded our Danville facility so that, beginning in 2002, our Danville facility was capable of independently manufacturing railcars and responsible for approximately 81% of our railcars produced during the year ended December 31, 2004 and 61% of our railcars manufactured during the six months ended June 30, 2005, and manufactured 100% and 68% of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars during the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. In December 2004, we changed our name from JAC Holdings International, Inc. to FreightCar America, Inc. to better reflect our business of manufacturing railcars. In April 2005, we completed our initial public offering. Also, in December 2004, we entered into an agreement to lease a railcar manufacturing facility in Roanoke, Virginia and commenced operations at this facility in the second quarter of 2005. For additional information regarding our new Roanoke facility, see “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations—Recent developments.”

Business

OUR BUSINESS STRENGTHS AND COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES

We believe that the following key business strengths and competitive advantages will contribute to our growth:

Leader in coal-carrying railcar market

We believe we are the leading manufacturer of coal-carrying railcars in North America, producing an estimated 81% of the coal-carrying railcars delivered in the North American market over the three years ended December 31, 2004. Through our leading position in the coal-carrying railcar market, we expect to benefit from the increasing use of coal as an energy source. We expect that the increasing demand for coal and the related increase in rail traffic transporting coal will lead to continuing demand in the coal-carrying railcar market.

Leading manufacturer of aluminum-bodied railcars

Since pioneering the modern aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar design in 1986, we believe that we have introduced more aluminum-bodied railcar types and have manufactured more aluminum-bodied railcars than any other company. Our aluminum BethGon railcar has been the leading aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar sold in North America for nearly 20 years. We produce aluminum-bodied railcars in each of our facilities in Danville, Illinois, Johnstown, Pennsylvania and Roanoke, Virginia.

We plan to leverage our expertise in aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar production as railroads and utilities continue to upgrade their fleets from aging steel-bodied coal-carrying railcars to lighter aluminum-bodied railcars. In addition, we are now building on our expertise in designing and manufacturing aluminum-bodied railcars by introducing other types of aluminum-bodied railcars, such as our newly-launched aluminum vehicle carriers. We believe that, since September 2003, 11 major orders for vehicle carriers were placed with railcar manufacturers, and we estimate that we captured approximately 26% of the units ordered. Although existing aluminum-bodied railcars currently represent only 44% of all coal-carrying railcars demand for aluminum-bodied railcars has increased from 40% of annual coal-carrying railcar deliveries in 1990 to 100% in 2004.

Strong relationships with long-term customer base

We have established long-term relationships with a customer base that includes some of the largest financial institutions, railroads and shippers in North America. Our main railroad customers include virtually all of the Class I railroads. Our largest railroad customers, based on sales over the last five years, included Union Pacific Corporation and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company. Over the last five years, our largest financial institution customers, based on sales, included TTX Company, GE Capital Corporation and CIT Group Inc. Over the last five years, our largest shipper customers, based on sales, included Southern Company Services, Inc., American Energy Fuels & Services Company and American Electric Power Company, Inc. We believe that our ability to meet our customers’ preference for reliable, high-quality products, the relatively high cost for customers to switch manufacturers, our technological leadership in developing innovative products and the competitive pricing of our railcars have helped us maintain our long-standing relationships with our customers.

Low-cost structure

Over the past several years, we have reduced our fixed costs and have increased our production efficiency through a series of operational changes and the introduction of proprietary production systems. These changes include our implementation of a statistical and data-driven approach to removing defects from

Business

manufacturing processes, enhancements to our information technology systems to support management and manufacturing decision-making, development of a real-time process control system, changes to increase labor efficiency and improvements to our materials and supply chain management. We continue to seek new ways to improve operational efficiencies and reduce our costs. We believe that the operational efficiency of our Danville railcar production facility, which produced approximately 81% of our railcar deliveries during the year ended December 31, 2004 and 61% of our railcars manufactured during the six months ended June 30, 2005, and manufactured and 100% and 68% of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars during the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively, has increased over the last six years resulting in a significant reduction in our manufacturing costs. We also have contractual arrangements with certain of our suppliers and customers that help limit our exposure to fluctuations in material prices. As a result of our low-cost structure, we were able to generate positive cash flow from operations during the most recent cyclical downturn in the railcar industry despite the decline in our sales.

Innovative product development

We base the introduction of new railcars on a combination of customer feedback, close observation of trends developing in market demand and our own innovations. In 2000, we introduced our aluminum-bodied, vehicle-carrying railcar that safely and economically carries a wide range of passenger vehicles. We believe our aluminum-bodied, vehicle-carrying railcar costs less to operate and maintain than vehicle- carrying steel-bodied railcars. In 2001, we introduced the AutoFlood III, which offers improved flow in the discharge of certain types of coal. We have added ten new or redesigned products to our portfolio in the last five years, and railcar designs introduced in the last four years represented 92% of the railcars that we produced in fiscal year 2004 and 91% of the railcars that we produced in the six months ended June 30, 2005. In addition, we continually work on refinements and improvements to our existing product lines and processes. We also hold several patents, including key patents for our one-piece center sill for railcars, our “MegaFlo” door system, our AutoFlood II lightweight hopper railcar and our top cord and side stake for coal-carrying railcars.

Stable labor relations

We have a collective bargaining agreement with the union representing the employees at our Danville facility, which expires on November 1, 2008. In November 2004, we entered into a settlement agreement with the union representing our existing and former unionized employees at our Johnstown facility setting forth the terms of a new collective bargaining agreement, which expires on May 15, 2008. We expect the settlement to allow our Johnstown facility to become more cost-competitive. The settlement, among other things, limits our future liabilities for health care coverage and pension benefits for retired unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. The settlement was conditioned on, among other things, approval by the NLRB and the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania of the settlement and the withdrawal of the NLRB charges, the Deemer and Britt lawsuits and certain workplace grievance matters. All of the conditions to the effectiveness of the settlement were met as of May 4, 2005. See “Business—Legal proceedings—Labor dispute settlement.” Our employees at our Roanoke facility are not represented by any union.

Strong and experienced management team

We have an experienced senior management team that has an average of over 28 years of experience in the railcar or other manufacturing industries. We believe that our management team has successfully managed our business during the most recent cyclical downturn in the railcar industry, and the continued contributions of our management team will be important for our future success. We intend to continue to capitalize on our management team’s experience and knowledge in our industry to grow our business.

Business

OUR STRATEGY

The key elements of our business strategy are as follows:

Maintain leadership in the coal-carrying railcar segment

Since we introduced our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar design in 1986, we have been the leading manufacturer of coal-carrying railcars in North America with an estimated 81% share of the coal-carrying railcars delivered over the three years ended December 31, 2004 in the North American market. We intend to continue to develop new and innovative railcar designs that respond to the needs of our customers, thereby capitalizing on the forecasted growth in coal usage in the United States.

Leverage aluminum expertise into new applications and railcar types

We are applying our expertise in aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar production to develop new types of railcars and related applications. For example, our aluminum vehicle carrier is a competitively priced alternative to a steel vehicle carrier for the efficient transport of new passenger vehicles. We believe that we have additional opportunities to develop applications and railcar types with our aluminum capabilities.

Continue to improve operating efficiencies

We intend to build on the success of our cost improvement initiatives at our Danville facility, and we will continue to identify opportunities to enhance operating efficiencies across our manufacturing facilities, including our Roanoke facility, thereby allowing us to reduce our costs and maintain competitive prices. These opportunities include reducing additional costs through our manufacturing processes, quality control initiatives, raw material procurement strategies and additional plant openings.

Continue to expand our product portfolio

We intend to continue to introduce new and improved railcar designs that respond to the needs of our customers. Although railcar designs historically have been slow to change, we have introduced ten new railcar designs or product-line extensions in the last five years. In addition to developing new aluminum-bodied railcar types, we may seek to expand our product portfolio to additional steel-bodied railcars. As the existing fleet of all railcars is aging, expansion of our product portfolio into new railcar types will allow us to grow by capturing a portion of the replacement demand for existing railcar types.

Continue to pursue incremental internal growth and additional external opportunities

We have significantly reduced our long-term debt. We expect our sources of funds for the next several years to consist primarily of cash provided by operations and borrowings under the revolving credit facility. As a result of significantly reducing our debt with the net proceeds received in our initial public offering, we have greater financial flexibility to supplement internal growth with select acquisitions. Additionally, in response to the current demand for our railcars, we are considering the addition of another manufacturing facility and exploring other opportunities to increase our production capacity. See “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations—Recent developments” regarding our new production facility in Roanoke, Virginia that we have leased. We also intend to expand into underserved international markets through licensing arrangements or through joint ventures with established railcar manufacturers. Our international efforts are aimed at capitalizing on attractive growth markets which have not been exposed to railcar design improvements that have been introduced in North America.

Business

OUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES

We design and manufacture aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars that are used in various industries. In particular, we have expertise in the manufacture of aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars. Many of our railcars can be customized, depending on the nature of the materials being transported and customer specifications.

The following table sets forth the main industry or application of each of our railcars, our railcar product associated with such industry or application and the percentage that each industry or application represents of the total number of railcars we delivered in the six months ended June 30, 2005. The types of railcars listed below include the major types of railcars that we are capable of manufacturing; however, some of the types of railcars listed below have not been ordered by any of our customers or manufactured by us in a number of years.


Industry/Application	Product Line	Percentage of Total Units Delivered During the Six Months Ended June 30, 2005
Coal-Carrying Railcars	Ø BethGon railcars Ø AutoFlood railcars Ø Aluminum Quad Hopper railcars Ø Flat Bottom Coal railcars	91%

Vehicle-Carrying and Intermodal Railcars	Ø Aluminum Vehicle Carrier railcars Ø Articulated Bulk Container railcars Ø Intermodal Well railcars	5%

Forest Products-Carrying Railcars	Ø Hybrid Center Beam railcars Ø Woodchip railcars Ø Bulkhead Flat railcars	3%

Industrial and Steel-Carrying Railcars	Ø Small Covered Hopper railcars Ø Mill Gondola railcars Ø Slab railcars Ø Coiled Steel railcars Ø Flat railcars	1%

Mineral-Carrying Railcars	Ø Ore Hopper railcars Ø Aggregate railcars	0%

Any of the railcar types listed above may be further developed and customized with particular characteristics, depending on the nature of the materials being transported and customer specifications. In addition, we refurbish and rebuild railcars and sell forged, cast and fabricated parts for all of the railcars that we manufacture, as well as those manufactured by others.

We also have established a licensing arrangement with a railcar manufacturer in Brazil pursuant to which our proprietary technology is used to produce covered hopper railcars for carrying grain. In addition, we manufacture coal-carrying railcars for export to Colombia and will manufacture intermodal railcars that we will be exporting to Saudi Arabia. We are also exploring opportunities in other international markets.

Set forth below is additional information on the features and uses of each of our railcar types.

Business

Coal-carrying railcars

We manufacture two primary types of coal-carrying railcars: gondolas and open-top hoppers. We build all of our coal-carrying railcars using a patented one-piece center sill, the main longitudinal structural component of the railcar. A one-piece center sill has a higher carrying capacity and is more durable than two-piece center sills and weighs significantly less than traditional multiple-piece seam-welded center sills. We are presently the only manufacturer of railcars with one-piece center sills. Coal-carrying railcars are purchased by financial institutions, railroads and shippers solely for the hauling of coal.

BethGon Series. Our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying gondola railcar, the BethGon, is the leader in the aluminum-bodied coal-carrying gondola railcar segment. We believe that the BethGon railcar can carry more coal with greater stability than traditional coal-carrying gondola railcars. Since we introduced the steel BethGon railcar in the late 1970s and the aluminum BethGon railcar in 1986, the BethGon railcar has become the most widely used coal-carrying railcar in North America, which we believe is due to its reputation for reliability. In 2004, our production of the aluminum BethGon railcar represented 76% of the railcars delivered in the aluminum gondola coal-carrying railcar market and 48% of all deliveries in the coal-carrying railcar market. The BethGon railcar represented 35%, 48%, 44% and 46% of all the railcars we delivered in the six months ended June 30, 2005 and the years 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

We have continuously improved the BethGon’s design since we began making this railcar. These improvements have been aimed at increasing carrying capacity and reducing weight while maintaining structural integrity. In 1986, we introduced the use of aluminum construction. The use of aluminum lowered each railcar’s weight from approximately 60,000 pounds to approximately 42,000 pounds. We believe that the new design increased hauling capacity by approximately nine tons per railcar over traditional flat-bottomed gondolas and lowered the railcar’s center of gravity, providing a smoother ride with less wear on the railcar. In 1994, we introduced a higher payload aluminum gondola coal-carrying railcar, called the AeroFlo BethGon, which had redesigned sides for improved aerodynamics and greater fuel efficiency. In 2002, we introduced a new gondola coal-carrying railcar, known as the BethGon II, which has a lighter weight, higher capacity and increased durability suitable for long-haul coal-carrying railcar service. We have received and have pending several patents on the features of the BethGon II and continue to explore ways to increase the BethGon II’s capacity and improve its reliability.

AutoFlood Series. Our aluminum open hopper railcar, the AutoFlood, is a five-pocket hopper coal-carrying railcar equipped with a bottom discharge gate mechanism. We began manufacturing AutoFlood railcars in 1984, and, in 1996, we introduced the AutoFlood II. The AutoFlood II has smooth exterior sides that we believe maximize loading capacity and increase efficiency by reducing wind drag. The AutoFlood II’s automatic rapid discharge system, the “MegaFlo” door system, incorporates a patented mechanism that uses an over-center locking design enabling the cargo door to close with tension rather than compression. The MegaFlo door system, which opens to its full width in only two seconds, provides a door opening which we believe is approximately 68% wider than any competing door system and does not require periodic door adjustments. In addition, the MegaFlo door system design reduces wear on the railcar. In 2002, we introduced the AutoFlood III model, which has a smooth interior side that maintains the features of the MegaFlo door system while improving the railcar’s flow characteristics for coal types that are difficult to unload. AutoFlood railcars can be equipped with rotary couplers to also permit rotary unloading. In 2004, our production of the AutoFlood III represented 31% of the total deliveries in the coal-carrying railcar market and 39% of the coal-carrying railcars that we produced. The AutoFlood series represented 56%, 30%, 32% and 43% of all the railcars we delivered in the six months ended June 30, 2005 and the years 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

Business

Aluminum Quad Hopper. The Quad Hopper is an outside stake open-top hopper coal-carrying railcar with a manual outlet door system. The Quad Hopper has a bottom discharge mechanism, and it can also be equipped with rotary couplers to maximize its unloading capabilities.

Other Coal-Carrying Railcars. We also manufacture a variety of other types of aluminum and steel-bodied coal-carrying railcars, including triple hopper and flat bottom gondola railcars.

Vehicle-carrying and intermodal railcars

Aluminum Vehicle Carrier. In 2000, we designed and introduced our aluminum vehicle-carrying railcar, combining our expertise with aluminum-bodied railcars and our experience in building flat railcars. Our first aluminum vehicle carrier railcar, known as the AVC, has a lightweight, integrated design and is used to transport automobiles, commercial and conversion vans, pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles from assembly plants and ports to rail distribution centers. An aluminum non-corrosive surface eliminates the need to paint the railcar during its expected lifetime. Our design helps to ensure that vehicles are delivered damage-free. AVCs are purchased by financial institutions, shippers and railroads. We had our first sale of the AVC in 2003.

Articulated Bulk Container Railcar. Our articulated bulk container railcar has high strength and capacity and is designed to carry dense bulk products up to 59,000 pounds in 20 and 40-foot containers. We sell our articulated bulk container railcars to financial institutions and shippers.

Intermodal Well Railcar. Our intermodal well railcars are used to transport containers that may also be transported by truck or ship, allowing cargo to be transported through different modes without loading and unloading.

Forest products-carrying railcars

Hybrid Center Beam Flat Railcar. Our FleXibeam center beam flat railcar is used to haul forest products, such as plywood, oriented strand board, dimensional lumber and steel products, such as structural steel and pipe. The FleXibeam hauls approximately 14,000 pounds of additional product than a conventional bulkhead flat railcar, and its short high-strength center beam partition allows easy loading of steel and other products with overhead cranes.

Woodchip Gondola Railcar. Our woodchip gondola railcar is used to haul woodchips and municipal waste or other high volume, low-density commodities. It has rotary couplers and incorporates our one-piece cold-rolled center sill and tub design.

Bulkhead Flat Railcar. Our bulkhead flat railcar has end bulkheads designed to retain the load, which can include forest products, steel and structural components.

We have added ten new or redesigned products to our portfolio in the last five years, including the BethGon II, AutoFlood III, AVC, FleXibeam, slab railcar and small covered hopper railcars and coiled steel railcars. Our new or redesigned products introduced in the last four years represented 92% of the railcars we produced in fiscal year 2004 and 91% of the railcars that we produced in the six months ended June 30, 2005. We expect these products to comprise an increasing percentage of future sales.

Industrial and steel-carrying railcars

Small Covered Hopper Railcar. Our small covered hopper railcar is used to transport high-density products such as roofing granules, fly ash, sand and cement. This railcar features our patented cold-rolled center sill, 30-inch diameter hatch covers and bottom-unloading outlets.

Business

Mill Gondola Railcar. Our mill gondola railcar is used to transport steel products and steel scrap and features our one-piece cold-rolled center sill, cast draft sills, pinned side-to-end connections and a choice of welded or riveted sides, depending on usage.

Slab Railcar. We believe that our slab railcar is the first railcar manufactured specifically to transport steel slabs. The slab railcar is a spine-type flat railcar that is approximately 20,000 pounds lighter than a standard mill gondola railcar that is also used to transport steel slabs, allowing customers to haul more steel slabs per railcar and more railcars in a train.

Coiled Steel Railcar. Our coiled steel railcar is a well-type flat railcar that is designed to carry coiled steel. Our design allows easy loading or unloading using overhead cranes or fork lifts. This feature allows railroads to compete with truck haulage for the transportation of coiled steel.

Flat Railcar. We produce a variety of standard and heavy-duty flat railcars that can carry a variety of products, including machinery and equipment, steel, forest products and other bulky industrial products. Our high capacity flat railcar is used to transport, among other things, electrical transformers and switch gear.

Mineral-carrying railcars

Ore Hopper Railcar. Our ore open-top hopper railcar is designed to carry iron ore, taconite and other ores and features our patented one-piece cold-rolled center sill.

Aggregate Railcar. Our aggregate open-top hopper railcars provide quick and clean discharge for our mining and aggregate customers.

Other products and services

International Railcar Designs. Although almost all of our railcar sales are in the North American market, we also manufacture railcars for customers in Colombia and have recently manufactured railcars for customers in Saudi Arabia. Railroads outside of North America have a variety of track gauges that are sized differently than in North America, which requires us, in some cases, to alter manufacturing specifications for foreign sales. In addition, we have entered into a licensing arrangement with a railcar manufacturer in Brazil that produces, among other railcars, covered hopper railcars for carrying grain.

Spare Parts and Kits. We sell replacement parts for our railcars and railcars built by others. We also produce railcar kits for assembly in the United States and certain international markets, such as Brazil. We plan to move our parts business to the Shell Plant when the lease for the parts facility in Richland Township, Pennsylvania expires.

MANUFACTURING

We operate railcar production facilities in Danville, Illinois, Johnstown, Pennsylvania, and Roanoke, Virginia. Our Danville facility was responsible for approximately 81% of our railcars produced during the year ended December 31, 2004 and 61% of our railcars manufactured during the six months ended June 30, 2005, and manufactured 100% and 68% of our aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcars during the year ended December 31, 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. Our Danville facility has the capacity to build up to 26 railcars per day on a single-shift operation. Our Johnstown facility has the capacity to build up to 27 railcars per day on a single-shift operation, depending upon the type of railcar. Our new Roanoke facility manufactures a variety of types of railcars, including aluminum-bodied and steel-bodied railcars. We delivered our first railcar manufactured at the Roanoke

Business

facility during the second quarter of 2005. See “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations—Recent developments.” Our Roanoke facility has the capacity to build up to 10 railcars per day on a single-shift operation.

Our Danville, Johnstown and Roanoke facilities have the capacity to incorporate additional workers to increase our rate of railcar production. Our Danville, Johnstown and Roanoke facilities are each certified or approved for certification by the Association of American Railroads, or the AAR, which sets railcar manufacturing industry standards for quality control.

We subcontract certain railcar production to Kasgro Rail Corp., which produced for us approximately 200 railcars during the year ended December 31, 2004 and 314 railcars during the six months ended June 30, 2005. Under our current agreements, we are able to subcontract Kasgro Rail Corp. to produce up to a total of 980 railcars for us through the end of 2005. Pursuant to the terms of the Johnstown settlement, we have agreed not to subcontract railcar production to Kasgro Rail Corp. after 2005.

Our manufacturing process involves four basic steps: fabrication, assembly, finishing and testing and inspection. In our fabrication processes, we employ standard metal working tools, many of which are computer controlled. Each assembly line typically involves 15 to 20 manufacturing positions, depending on the complexity of the particular railcar design. We use mechanical fastening in the fitting and assembly of our aluminum-bodied railcar parts, while we typically use welding for our steel-bodied railcars. For aluminum-bodied railcars, we begin the finishing process by cleaning the railcar’s surface and then applying the paint and decals. In the case of steel-bodied railcars, we begin the finishing process by blasting the surface area of the railcar and then painting it. We use water-based paints to reduce the emission of volatile organic compounds, and we meet state and U.S. federal regulations for control of emissions and disposal of hazardous materials. Once we have completed the finishing process, our employees, along with representatives of the customer purchasing the particular railcar, inspect and test all railcars for final quality assurance. Each of our facilities has numerous separate checkpoints at which we inspect products to maintain quality control, a process that our operations management continuously monitors.

We have focused on making our manufacturing facilities more flexible and cost-efficient while at the same time reducing product change-over times and improving product quality. We developed many of these improvements with the participation of our manufacturing employees, management and customers. At our Danville facility in particular, we have implemented cellular manufacturing concepts, whereby various manufacturing steps are accomplished in one location within the facility to eliminate unnecessary movement of parts within the facility, improve production rates and reduce inventories. These improvements are intended to provide us with increased flexibility in scheduling the production of orders and to minimize down-time resulting from railcar type change-overs, thereby increasing the efficiency and lowering costs of our manufacturing operations.

CUSTOMERS

We have strong long-term relationships with many large purchasers of railcars. Long-term customers are particularly important in the railcar industry given the limited number of buyers and sellers of railcars.

Our customer base consists mostly of North American financial institutions, shippers and railroads. Over the last five years, our largest financial institution customers, based on sales, included TTX Company, GE Capital Corporation and CIT Group Inc. Over the last five years, our largest shipper customers, based on sales, included Southern Company Services, Inc., American Energy Fuels & Services Company

Business

and American Electric Power Company, Inc. Our main railroad customers include virtually all of the Class I railroads. Our largest railroad customers, based on sales over the last five years, included Union Pacific Corporation and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company. We believe that our customers’ preference for reliable, high-quality products, the relatively high cost for customers to switch manufacturers, our technological leadership in developing and enhancing innovative products and competitive pricing of our railcars have helped us maintain our long standing relationships with our customers.

While we maintain strong relationships with our customers and we serve over 70 active customers, many customers do not purchase railcars from us every year since railcar fleets are not necessarily replenished or augmented every year. The size and frequency of railcar orders often results in a small number of customers representing a significant portion of our sales in a given year. Our top three customers in 2004 based on total sales were Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company, Canadian Pacific Railway Company and TTX Company, which accounted for approximately 21%, 10% and 9%, respectively, of our sales in 2004. Our top three customers for the six months ended June 30, 2005 based on total sales were NRG Energy, Inc., Progress Energy, Inc. and Mitsui Rail Corporation, which accounted for approximately 19%, 16% and 10%, respectively, of our sales during the period.

SALES AND MARKETING

Our direct sales group is organized geographically with six sales managers and three product line managers, a manager of customer service and support staff. The direct sales group is responsible for managing customer relationships. Our product line managers are responsible for product planning and contract administration. Our manager of customer service is responsible for after-sale follow-up and in-field product performance review.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Our railcar research and development activities provide us with an important competitive advantage. We believe that we are a leader in introducing new and improved railcar designs that respond to the needs of our customers. Railcar designs have been historically slow to change in our industry. We have introduced ten new railcar designs or product-line extensions in the last five years. Our research and development team, working within our engineering group, is dedicated to the design of new products. In addition, the team continuously identifies design upgrades for our existing railcars, which we implement as part of our effort to reduce costs and improve quality. We introduce new railcar designs as a result of a combination of customer feedback and close observation of market demand trends. Our engineers use current modeling software, and we have recently installed three-dimensional modeling technology to assist with product design. New product designs are tested for compliance with AAR standards prior to introduction. Costs associated with research and development are expensed as incurred and totaled $0.8 million, $0.2 million, $0.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004, respectively, and $0.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005.

BACKLOG

We define backlog as the value of products or services to which our customers have committed in writing to purchase from us, which have not been recognized as sales. Our contracts include cancellation clauses under which customers are required, upon cancellation of the contract, to reimburse us for costs incurred in reliance on an order and to compensate us for lost profits. However, customer orders may be subject to customer requests for delays in railcar deliveries, inspection rights and other customary industry terms and conditions, which could prevent or delay backlog from being converted into sales.

Business

The following table depicts our reported railcar backlog in number of railcars and estimated future sales value attributable to such backlog, for the periods shown.


	Year ended December 31,									Six months ended June 30,
	2002			2003			2004			2004			2005
Railcar backlog at start of period		2,178			1,067			6,444			6,444			11,397
New railcars delivered		(3,942	)		(4,550	)		(7,484	)		(3,128	)		(5,704	)
New railcar orders		2,831			9,927			12,437			5,103			10,174

Railcar backlog at end of period		1,067			6,444			11,397			8,419			15,867

Estimated backlog at end of period (in thousands)(1)	$	55,887		$	365,876		$	747,842		$	540,127		$	1,062,977

(1)

Our reported railcar backlog has increased from 1,067 railcars at the end of 2002 to 15,867 railcars as of June 30, 2005, which we believe is primarily due to the current economic recovery, which is resulting in the replacement of aging railcar fleets, and the increasing demand for electricity and the increasing demand for steel, thereby increasing the demand for coal-carrying railcars and industrial and steel-carrying railcars, respectively. We expect that substantially all of our reported backlog as of June 30, 2005 will be converted to sales by the first quarter of 2007. However, our reported backlog may not be converted to sales in any particular period, if at all, and the actual sales from these contracts may not equal our reported backlog estimates. See “Risk factors—Risks related to our business—The level of our reported backlog may not necessarily indicate what our future sales will be and our actual sales may fall short of the estimated sales value attributed to our backlog.”

SUPPLIERS AND MATERIALS

The cost of raw materials and components represents approximately 89% of the direct manufacturing costs of most of our railcar product lines. As a result, the management of purchasing is critical to our profitability. As our products are made to order, we do not purchase materials or components until we receive an order and we time deliveries to minimize our inventory. We enjoy strong relationships with our suppliers, which helps to ensure access to supplies when railcar demand is high.

Our primary component suppliers include Amsted Industries Inc., which supplies us with castings and couplers through its American Steel Foundries subsidiary, wheels through its Griffin Wheel Company subsidiary, draft components through its Keystone subsidiary and bearings through its Brenco subsidiary. Roll Form Group, a division of Samuel Manu-Tech, Inc., is the sole supplier of all of our cold-rolled center sills, which were used in approximately 92% of our railcars produced in 2004 and approximately 96% of our railcars produced in the six months ended June 30, 2005. Other suppliers provide brake

Business

systems, components, axles and bearings. The railcar industry is subject to supply constraints for some of the key railcar components. See “Risk factors—Risks related to the railcar industry—Limitations on the supply of heavy castings, wheels and other railcar components could adversely affect our business because they may limit the number of railcars we can manufacture.”

Our primary aluminum suppliers are Alcoa Inc. and Alcan Inc. We purchase steel primarily from U.S. sources, except for our cold-rolled center sills, which we purchase from a single Canadian supplier. A center sill is the primary longitudinal structural component of a railcar. Our center sill is formed into its final shape without heating by passing steel plate through a series of rollers. Aluminum prices generally are fixed at the time that a railcar order is accepted, mitigating the effect of future fluctuations in prices.

Except as described above, there are usually at least two suppliers for each of our raw materials and specialty components, and we actively purchase from over 200 suppliers. No single supplier accounted for more than 17% of our total purchases in 2004 and during the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively. Our top ten suppliers accounted for 61% and 58% of our total purchases in 2004 and during the six months ended June 30, 2005, respectively.

COMPETITION

We operate in a highly competitive marketplace. Competition is based on price, type of product, product quality, product design, reputation for quality, reliability of delivery and customer service and support.

There has been significant consolidation in the industry in recent years due to reduced levels of demand. We compete with the three other principal manufacturers in the North American railcar market, which are Trinity Industries, Inc., National Steel Car Limited and The Greenbrier Companies, Inc. ACF Industries, Inc. and Union Tank Car Company are railcar manufacturers that build railcars primarily for their own leasing fleets. Trinity Industries is our only current competitor in the North American aluminum-bodied coal-carrying railcar market.

Competition in the North American market from railcar manufacturers located outside of North America is limited by, among other factors, high shipping costs and technical railcar manufacturing specifications unique to the North American market. In addition, some non-U.S. railcar manufacturers lack the technology required to manufacture railcars for North American customers that would be competitive with the railcars produced in North America.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

We have several U.S. and non-U.S. patents and pending applications, registered trademarks, copyrights and trade names. Our key patents include patents for our one-piece center sill for railcars, our “MegaFlo” door system, the body design of our AutoFlood II lightweight hopper railcar and our top cord and side stake for coal-carrying railcars. The protection of our intellectual property is important to our business.

We also use a proprietary software system that integrates our accounting and production systems, including quality control, purchasing, inventory control and accounts receivable. We have an experienced team in place to operate the hardware, software and communications platforms.

In addition, we currently have a licensing arrangement with a railcar manufacturer in Brazil pursuant to which the railcar manufacturer uses our proprietary technology to produce covered hopper railcars for carrying grain.

Business

EMPLOYEES

As of June 30, 2005, we had 1,329 employees, of whom 190 were salaried and 1,139 were hourly wage earners. As of June 30, 2005, we employed approximately 437 hourly workers at our Danville facility, 500 hourly workers at our Johnstown facility and 202 hourly workers at our Roanoke facility. Approximately 937, or 71%, of our employees are members of unions. Our employees at our Roanoke facility are not represented by any union.

We have a collective bargaining agreement, which expires on November 1, 2008, with the UAW, representing approximately 90% of our employees at the Danville facility. On November 15, 2004, our subsidiary entered into a settlement agreement with the USWA that sets forth the terms of a new collective bargaining agreement, which expires on May 15, 2008. The USWA represents approximately 81% of our employees at the Johnstown facility and approximately 38% of our total workforce as of June 30, 2005. The Johnstown settlement was conditioned on, among other things, approval by the NLRB and the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania of the settlement and the withdrawal of certain NLRB charges, the Deemer and Britt lawsuits and certain workplace grievance matters. All of the conditions to the effectiveness of the settlement were met as of May 4, 2005. See “Business—Legal proceedings—Labor dispute settlement.”

While we now consider our relations with our employees to be good at our Danville, Johnstown and Roanoke facilities, they may not remain that way. See “Risk factors—Risks related to our business—Labor disputes may disrupt our operations and divert the attention of our management and may have a material adverse effect on our operations and profitability.”

REGULATION

The Federal Railroad Administration, or FRA, administers and enforces U.S. federal laws and regulations relating to railroad safety. These regulations govern equipment and safety compliance standards for freight railcars and other rail equipment used in interstate commerce. The AAR promulgates a wide variety of rules and regulations governing safety and design of equipment, relationships among railroads with respect to freight railcars in interchange and other matters. The AAR also certifies freight railcar manufacturers and component manufacturers that provide equipment for use on railroads in the United States. New products must generally undergo AAR testing and approval processes. As a result of these regulations, we must maintain certifications with the AAR as a freight railcar manufacturer, and products that we sell must meet AAR and FRA standards.

We are also subject to oversight in other jurisdictions by foreign regulatory agencies, such as Transport Canada and the Mexico Institute of Transportation, and to the extent that we expand our business internationally, we will increasingly be subject to the regulations of other non-U.S. jurisdictions.

ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

We are subject to comprehensive federal, state, local and international environmental laws and regulations relating to the release or discharge of materials into the environment, the management, use, processing, handling, storage, transport or disposal of hazardous materials, or otherwise relating to the protection of human health and the environment. These laws and regulations not only expose us to liability for our own negligent acts, but also may expose us to liability for the conduct of others or for our actions which were in compliance with all applicable laws at the time these actions were taken. In addition, these laws may require significant expenditures to achieve compliance, and are frequently

Business

modified or revised to impose new obligations. Civil and criminal fines and penalties may be imposed for non-compliance with these environmental laws and regulations. Our operations that involve hazardous materials also raise potential risks of liability under the common law.

Environmental operating permits are, or may be, required for our operations under these laws and regulations. These operating permits are subject to modification, renewal and revocation. We regularly monitor and review our operations, procedures and policies for compliance with these laws and regulations. Despite these compliance efforts, risk of environmental liability is inherent in the operation of our businesses, as it is with other companies engaged in similar businesses. We believe that our operations and facilities are in substantial compliance with applicable laws and regulations and that any noncompliance is not likely to have a material adverse effect on our operations or financial condition.

Future events, such as changes in or modified interpretations of existing laws and regulations or enforcement policies, or further investigation or evaluation of the potential health hazards of products or business activities, may give rise to additional compliance and other costs that could have a material adverse effect on our financial conditions and operations. In addition, we have in the past conducted investigation and remediation activities at properties that we own to address historic contamination. To date such costs have not been material. Although we believe we have satisfactorily addressed all known material contamination through our remediation activities, there can be no assurance that these activities have addressed all historic contamination. The discovery of historic contamination or the release of hazardous substances into the environment could require us in the future to incur investigative or remedial costs or other liabilities that could be material or that could interfere with the operation of our business.

In addition to environmental laws, the transportation of commodities by railcar raises potential risks in the event of a derailment or other accident. Generally, liability under existing law in the United States for a derailment or other accident depends on the negligence of the party, such as the railroad, the shipper or the manufacturer of the railcar or its components. However, for certain hazardous commodities being shipped, strict liability concepts may apply.

Business

PROPERTY

We own railcar production facilities in Danville, Illinois and Johnstown, Pennsylvania and we lease a railcar production facility in Roanoke, Virginia. The following table presents information on our leased and owned operating properties as of June 30, 2005:


Use	Location	Size	Leased or Owned	Lease Expiration Date

Corporate headquarters	Chicago, Illinois	4,540 square feet	Leased	June 30, 2008

Railcar assembly and component manufacturing	Danville, Illinois	308,665 square feet on 36.5 acres of land	Owned	—

Railcar assembly and component manufacturing	Roanoke, Virginia	11.6 acres of land	Leased	November 30, 2014*

Railcar assembly and component manufacturing	Johnstown, Pennsylvania	564,983 square feet on 31.9 acres of land	Owned	—

Administrative	Johnstown, Pennsylvania	29,500 square feet on 1.02 acres of land	Owned	—

Light storage	Johnstown, Pennsylvania	1,633 square feet on 14.26 acres of land	Owned	—

Parts warehouse	Johnstown, Pennsylvania	86,000 square feet	Leased	May 9, 2007

Light storage (Shell Plant)	Johnstown, Pennsylvania	163,692 square feet on 34 acres of land	Owned	—

The lease agreement provides that we or Norfolk Southern, the lessor, can terminate this lease at any time after December 31, 2009.

In November 2002, we discontinued railcar production at the Shell Plant in Johnstown, Pennsylvania due to manufacturing capacity in excess of market demand. We do not anticipate any future production of railcars at the Shell Plant. We intend to continue to use the Shell Plant for storage and intend to move our parts warehouse to the Shell Plant when the lease for our existing parts warehouse expires in 2007. In connection with our discontinuation of production at our Shell Plant, on September 30, 2004, we recorded a charge of $0.3 million relating to the carrying value of certain equipment to be written off and determined that no other asset impairment charge is currently necessary.

INSURANCE

We purchase insurance to cover standard risks in our industry, including policies to cover general and products liability, workers compensation, automobile liability and other casualty and property risks. We also have insurance to cover the risk of flood damage to our facilities. We carry insurance having terms typical of our industry and product lines.

Business

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Labor dispute settlement

On November 15, 2004, our subsidiary JAC entered into a settlement agreement with the USWA which represents our unionized employees in our Johnstown, Pennsylvania manufacturing facility. Our unionized employees at our Johnstown facility, who comprise approximately 38% of our total workforce as of June 30, 2005, had been without a collective bargaining agreement since October 2001. The settlement agreement sets forth the terms of a new 42-month collective bargaining agreement with our unionized employees at our Johnstown facility. The settlement agreement also provides for the resolution of charges made by the USWA against us with the NLRB, the Deemer and Britt lawsuits, and certain workplace grievance matters. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the plaintiffs in the Deemer and Britt lawsuits agreed to withdraw their lawsuits with prejudice, the USWA agreed to request that the NLRB prosecutor withdraw the NLRB charges against us and certain other workplace grievance matters are to be withdrawn.

Labor disputes

Collective Bargaining NLRB Charge. In January 2002, the USWA filed charges with the NLRB alleging that JAC engaged in unfair labor practices in violation of the National Labor Relations Act, or the NLRA, in connection with its negotiations with the USWA for a new collective bargaining agreement following the expiration of the previous collective bargaining agreement in October 2001. The NLRB case included charges made by the plaintiffs in the Britt lawsuit (as described below).

Deemer and Britt Lawsuits. When Bethlehem Steel Corporation, or Bethlehem Steel, sold its railcar operations to TTII in October 1991, Bethlehem Steel agreed to pay for the costs of postretirement benefits of former Bethlehem Steel employees who were over the age of 43 at the time of the sale, left Bethlehem Steel to work for TTII and subsequently retired, whom we collectively refer to as the Bethlehem retirees. Bethlehem Steel continued to pay the costs of postretirement benefits for the Bethlehem retirees after TTII sold its railcar business to an investor group led by our management in June 1999. However, Bethlehem Steel stopped making these payments in June 2001 and subsequently filed for bankruptcy relief under Chapter 11 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code in October 2001. We ceased providing these unpaid postretirement benefits to the Bethlehem retirees on May 1, 2002. In April 2002, JAC became a defendant, together with TTII and the entity that administered the medical plan that previously covered the Bethlehem retirees, in a federal class action lawsuit filed by the USWA and individual plaintiffs, led by Geraldine Deemer. We also refer to this class action as the Deemer lawsuit. The Deemer lawsuit primarily alleged that we violated the NLRA and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, or ERISA, by eliminating certain medical and life insurance benefits for the Bethlehem retirees, the costs of which had previously been paid by Bethlehem Steel.

In September 2003, JAC became a defendant, together with TTII and the entity that administered pension and medical plans for JAC’s unionized employees, in an additional federal class action lawsuit filed by the USWA and individual plaintiffs, led by Reggie Britt. We refer to this class action as the Britt lawsuit. The Britt lawsuit primarily alleged that we violated the NLRA and ERISA by eliminating certain monthly pension supplements and retiree medical insurance that JAC had previously provided under its early retirement pension plans.

Workplace Grievance NLRB Charge. In January 2002, current and former employees filed an NLRB charge relating to wages and certain workplace grievances.

Business

Terms of the settlement

Under the settlement agreement, JAC contributes, commencing on January 1, 2005, amounts for health care benefits for JAC’s active employees and their qualified dependents. JAC’s contributions fund 100% of the health care coverage costs of active employees. With respect to current and future retirees (including the retirees involved in the Deemer lawsuit and the Britt lawsuit), effective on December 1, 2004, JAC pays amounts not exceeding $700 per month for each household where neither the retiree nor his or her spouse is eligible for Medicare benefits, which fixed amount is reduced to $450 per month when either the retiree or his or her spouse becomes eligible for Medicare benefits. We made payments of $0.8 million in 2004 and expect to make payments of $2.8 million in 2005 (of which $1.4 million has been paid as of June 30, 2005) and $3.1 million in 2006 for health care costs.

Commencing on February 1, 2005, JAC contributes amounts for increased pension benefits for JAC employees, not to exceed $40 or $50 per month per year of service, depending on whether the years of service occurred prior to or after the effective date of the settlement. In addition, each employee with at least 30 years of service with JAC (including service with its predecessor Bethlehem Steel) who retired or will retire between January 21, 2002 and May 15, 2008 will be eligible for supplemental payments of $400 per month until the retiree qualifies for Social Security benefits, to the extent the supplemental payments are not paid by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Each retiree covered by the Britt lawsuit will also be eligible for supplemental payments of $400 per month until the retiree qualifies for Social Security benefits. JAC’s obligation to pay the supplemental payments to both groups will survive the expiration of the new collective bargaining agreement. The settlement agreement also provides for the discontinuation of JAC’s early retirement benefits under its “Rule-of-65” pension program, which made employees eligible for retirement when their number of years of service plus their age equaled or exceeded 65 years. We made contributions of $4.8 million in 2004 and expect to make contributions of approximately $4.0 million in 2005 relating to pension costs, of which $1.7 million has been made as of June 30, 2005.

During the term of the collective bargaining agreement only, JAC will make quarterly contributions to a trust equal to $0.60 per each hour of work by JAC employees, plus 3% of our consolidated quarterly profits (as calculated under the settlement agreement). These funds will be used to provide supplemental unemployment benefits, additional health care benefits for active employees and/or additional severance benefits, in such amounts as determined from time to time by us, the USWA and a neutral third party acceptable to both the USWA and us.

The settlement agreement also provides for: (1) the termination by December 31, 2005 of our existing manufacturing subcontracting relationship with Kasgro Rail Corp.; (2) the conditions under which we may use third parties to perform work related to the manufacture of railcars; (3) rates of pay and wage increases for existing and future covered unionized employees; (4) our commitment to make reasonable and necessary capital expenditures required to maintain the competitive status of the Johnstown facilities; (5) our obligation to offer at least 40 hours of work to all covered unionized employees for various periods not exceeding the term of the settlement agreement; and (6) the development of a new employee orientation program. In addition, we may not, within one year following the expiration date of the settlement agreement, consummate any transaction resulting in a change of control (excluding any change of control arising from a public offering of registered securities, such as this offering) or sell or transfer any plant or significant part thereof covered by the settlement agreement to any third party unless the buyer has entered into one or more agreements recognizing the USWA as the bargaining representative for the unionized employees at our Johnstown facility and establishing the terms and conditions of employment through a new collective bargaining agreement or an assumption of the then-existing collective bargaining agreement.

Business

The settlement agreement also provides for one-time payments by us of (1) $1.4 million in the aggregate to the current and former employees of JAC for whom charges were filed (including the Britt lawsuit plaintiffs); (2) $0.3 million to the Deemer lawsuit and Britt lawsuit plaintiffs for losses arising from the termination of their retirement health care coverage prior to the settlement; and (3) $0.2 million in attorney’s fees incurred by plaintiffs and us in connection with the settlement.

In addition to the one-time payments described above, we have agreed to pay $0.2 million to settle our outstanding workplace grievances, with certain limited exceptions. The USWA agreed to withdraw any NLRB charges associated with these grievances.

The settlement was conditioned on, among other things, (1) ratification of the settlement by the union members; (2) approval of the settlement by class members in the Deemer lawsuit and the Britt lawsuit; (3) approval by the NLRB of the settlement and the withdrawal of NLRB charges filed against us; and (4) approval by the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania of the settlement (except with respect to JAC’s agreement to pay future health care and pension benefits following the effective date, which obligation was not contingent on court approval) and the withdrawal of the Britt lawsuit and the Deemer lawsuit. The settlement was ratified by the union members on November 15, 2004. In February 2005, the NLRB approved the settlement and withdrew the charges against us. On May 4, 2005, the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania approved the settlement. Accordingly, all of the conditions to the effectiveness of the settlement were met as of May 4, 2005.

See “Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations” and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes regarding the impact of the settlement on our financial condition and results.

Other

We are also involved in certain other threatened and pending legal proceedings, including workers’ compensation and employee matters arising out of the conduct of our business. Additionally, we are involved in various warranty and repair claims and related threatened and pending legal proceedings with our customers in the normal course of business. While the ultimate outcome of such legal proceedings cannot be determined at this time, it is the opinion of management that the resolution of these actions will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

Management

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS

Set forth below is information concerning our current directors and executive officers, including their ages as of August 30, 2005.


Name	Age	Position
John E. Carroll, Jr.	62	President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
Kevin P. Bagby	54	Vice President, Finance, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
Glen T. Karan	54	Vice President, Planning and Administration
Edward J. Whalen	57	Senior Vice President, Marketing and Sales
Camillo M. Santomero, III	47	Chairman of the Board
Jay R. Bloom	49	Director
James D. Cirar	58	Director
Mark D. Dalton	43	Director
S. Carl Soderstrom, Jr.	52	Director